Book of Mormon/LDS Contradictions

[jinc1019]

Hi Everyone,

As many of you know, I am not a Mormon and did grow up in an environment where Mormonism was popular or well-established. As such, there is much about Mormonism I do now know and I have been trying to learn as much as possible in recent weeks. Many of you have been a wonderful help and I hope that you could explain a perceived problem I have with the Book of Mormon that seems to show a contradiction between what the Book of Mormon says and what Joseph Smith later prophesized.

In the Book of Mormon (Alma 11:44, Mosiah 15:5, 2 Nephi 31:21), it clearly says that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is "one God." In all three of those occasions, there is no mention of a "Godhead" or three separate beings. Joseph Smith later, as you all know, taught that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were all separate beings.

Can any of you explain this perceived contradiction?

[estradling75]

It comes down to what is meant by being One... Typical Christianity says it means of one Substance... This is weakened by the facts when they show up distinct from one another. (Christ being baptized, Holy Ghost in the form of a Dove, the Father speaking from heaven).

LDS very much believe that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one. But that is a oneness of Heart, of Mind, and of Purpose, not of substance. This is the same kind of oneness that we are instructed to strive for, both with our fellow man and with the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit

[Guest]

Hi Everyone,

As many of you know, I am not a Mormon and did grow up in an environment where Mormonism was popular or well-established. As such, there is much about Mormonism I do now know and I have been trying to learn as much as possible in recent weeks. Many of you have been a wonderful help and I hope that you could explain a perceived problem I have with the Book of Mormon that seems to show a contradiction between what the Book of Mormon says and what Joseph Smith later prophesized.

In the Book of Mormon (Alma 11:44, Mosiah 15:5, 2 Nephi 31:21), it clearly says that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is "one God." In all three of those occasions, there is no mention of a "Godhead" or three separate beings. Joseph Smith later, as you all know, taught that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were all separate beings.

Can any of you explain this perceived contradiction?

Very easy. Especially since you have Catholic background. Both LDS and Catholic believe that there are Three Persons in One God.

For Catholics - and most other non-LDS Christians. The word God refers to a Being. That's why when they say One God, they have to go through mental gymnastics to have a Being that is one substance yet have 3 Persons. Nobody knows what that Substance is exactly. People describe its qualities but they don't know what material it is hence the term the Great Mystery.

For LDS - there's no need to figure out a different material for God because the word God refers to a State of Being. One God means there is one and only one State of Being that is God. There are 3 Persons that have achieved that State of Being, the first of which is God the Heavenly Father. LDS and Catholics have the exact same description of the qualities that describe God.

The difference becomes more clear when you go through the biblical passages where Jesus tells us that we too can become gods. For Catholics, this just means we can achieve Godly qualities but we can never become God because we are not the same material as God. For LDS, this means, we can achieve that State of Being and be exactly like God as we are the same material as God. This is what Catholics protest as LDS heresy.

Edited November 12, 2013 by anatess

[rameumptom]

There is a context behind the statement: Father, Son and Holy Ghost are One God.

Especially in 2 Ne 31 and 3 Ne 11, we see that Nephi and Jesus teach the people that there are two religions: God's and Satan's. Satan's religion is based on contention and disunity. But Jesus tells his Nephite discples that they must learn to be one, even as the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are one.

In this, both Nephi and Jesus explain that the path to unity begins with Faith in Christ, repentance, baptism (or some ritual ordinance), and receiving the Gift of the Holy Ghost.

In receiving the Holy Ghost, we learn to become one with each other AND with the 3rd member of the Godhead. He then leads us to Christ, who prepares us and takes us to the Father. But it all requires being One. First with each other, and then with the Godhead itself, which is one Godhead.

[jinc1019]

It seems odd to me though that in the Old Testament, in the New Testament, and in the entirety of the Book of Mormon, there is no mention of God being separate beings...If something as important as this were true, shouldn't it appear somewhere else other than in Joseph Smith's revelations in the 19th century?

[Guest]

It seems odd to me though that in the Old Testament, in the New Testament, and in the entirety of the Book of Mormon, there is no mention of God being separate beings...If something as important as this were true, shouldn't it appear somewhere else other than in Joseph Smith's revelations in the 19th century?

It is quite obvious that there are 3 persons - God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost. It is all over the Bible. Maybe I don't understand the question? What is not in the bible is that these 3 personages is One Being. There many many many passages that say they are One. But it never says they're one Being.

Might be a good time to introduce the greek word Ousia...

Edited November 12, 2013 by anatess

[Guest]

To us it is obvious, though. It's not said verbatim that God the Father is a separate being from Christ. But it's obvious to us when Jesus prays to the Father, or when the Holy Ghost appears to Him in the form of a dove.

[NeuroTypical]

It seems odd to me though that in the Old Testament, in the New Testament, and in the entirety of the Book of Mormon, there is no mention of God being separate beings...

And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him: And there came a voice from heaven, saying, "Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."

This account was so important, it's included each of the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. It doesn't make things as clear as we might hope, Trinitarians can still talk about a single God being present in different forms at the same time, etc. But it's most certainly there - Jesus was sitting there wet, and a voice that was not His came down from the heavens, where he wasn't, specifically calling Him "Son". It doesn't make any sense to me, to believe God was pleased with Himself. If my arm does something my brain wants it to, I may be pleased, but I'm not exactly happy for my arm and pleased with it...

As for your opening question, I find so much in scripture supporting both positions, that whenever a believer comes to me with supposed contradictions in the BoM, I really don't need to do anything besides point to the fact that we're both in the same boat, and if one of us sinks, the other does too.

Edited November 12, 2013 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[estradling75]

It seems odd to me though that in the Old Testament, in the New Testament, and in the entirety of the Book of Mormon, there is no mention of God being separate beings...If something as important as this were true, shouldn't it appear somewhere else other than in Joseph Smith's revelations in the 19th century?

You are reading it and filtering by your preconceived notions of what God is... You expect there to be One God so that is what you see. And when the scriptures show instances of them being separate you automatically jump to your explanation of why it doesn't really mean that. Thus you don't what to see all the references because you have already explained them away.

Everyone does this. It simply means we are going to understand the same passages quite differently because of it.

For example Parse Christ' baptism... Explain how the text putting the Father, Son and Holy Ghost in plain and clearly different physical locations is answered in the Oneness of physical substance. You can do, it many have... But for us it is a very clear showing of different physical substance

[Just_A_Guy]

The Father and the Son: a Doctrinal Exposition

[skippy740]

D&c 130:22

22 the father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the son also; but the holy ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of spirit. Were it not so, the holy ghost could not dwell in us.

[rameumptom]

Actually, the early Jews and Christians saw God as anthropomorphic. Just look at how he is described through most of the Old Testament. Noah and Moses spoke face to face with God. And in the New Testament, we have examples of Jesus praying to the Father, Jesus' baptism showing the three separate beings, the Mount of Transfiguration showing the separate beings, Jesus at Gethsemane saying "Not my will by thine be done" showing two wills involved, and Christ on the cross asking the Father why he forsake him (a single being cannot forsake himself). Finally, Stephen the martyr of Acts saw Jesus standing on the right hand of God, who sat on his throne. Clearly anthropomorphic AND separate beings.

There are many more examples in the scriptures, but these are very clear to show that the Godhead are three physically separate beings.

Finally, who/what is more perfect: God the Father without a physical body, or Jesus Christ with a resurrected physical body?

The traditional concept of the Trinity came about only in the 2nd and 3d centuries AD, and only after many of the bishops and other church leaders began reading the scriptures through the lens of Greek philosophy. Aristotle had taught there is only one God, who is of pure spirit. He said that we cannot be like him, as we are made of impure spirit. Therefore man cannot be like God. Early Christians in the 3rd century AD argued over the Godhead.

The Nicene Creed was formed in the early 4th century from a meeting of many bishops. It was a very political event, with 3 concepts of God considered:

1. Athanasius' concept of Father, Son and Holy Ghost being one substance

2. Arius' concept that the Father and Son are separate beings, and since there is only one God, Jesus is Lord, not God.

3. Origen's concept (from a century before) that the Father and Son are both Gods, with Jesus as subordinate to the Father. Eusebius of Caesarea (historian of early church) defended this concept, but was quickly forced to be silent or be lumped in with the Arians.

Athanasius' creed ruled the day, but within a few decades it was out of favor and the Arius doctrine was favored by the Church for almost a century. St Augustine and Jerome restrengthened the concept of a Trinity, and it has been the tradition since.

However, the earliest Jews and Christians do not seem to understand the concept of One Substance Trinity, but more of a Social Trinity, where the Father and Son are separate beings but one in all they do.

[Guest]

Actually, the early Jews and Christians saw God as anthropomorphic. Just look at how he is described through most of the Old Testament. Noah and Moses spoke face to face with God. And in the New Testament, we have examples of Jesus praying to the Father, Jesus' baptism showing the three separate beings, the Mount of Transfiguration showing the separate beings, Jesus at Gethsemane saying "Not my will by thine be done" showing two wills involved, and Christ on the cross asking the Father why he forsake him (a single being cannot forsake himself). Finally, Stephen the martyr of Acts saw Jesus standing on the right hand of God, who sat on his throne. Clearly anthropomorphic AND separate beings.

There are many more examples in the scriptures, but these are very clear to show that the Godhead are three physically separate beings.

Finally, who/what is more perfect: God the Father without a physical body, or Jesus Christ with a resurrected physical body?

The traditional concept of the Trinity came about only in the 2nd and 3d centuries AD, and only after many of the bishops and other church leaders began reading the scriptures through the lens of Greek philosophy. Aristotle had taught there is only one God, who is of pure spirit. He said that we cannot be like him, as we are made of impure spirit. Therefore man cannot be like God. Early Christians in the 3rd century AD argued over the Godhead.

The Nicene Creed was formed in the early 4th century from a meeting of many bishops. It was a very political event, with 3 concepts of God considered:

1. Athanasius' concept of Father, Son and Holy Ghost being one substance

2. Arius' concept that the Father and Son are separate beings, and since there is only one God, Jesus is Lord, not God.

3. Origen's concept (from a century before) that the Father and Son are both Gods, with Jesus as subordinate to the Father. Eusebius of Caesarea (historian of early church) defended this concept, but was quickly forced to be silent or be lumped in with the Arians.

Athanasius' creed ruled the day, but within a few decades it was out of favor and the Arius doctrine was favored by the Church for almost a century. St Augustine and Jerome restrengthened the concept of a Trinity, and it has been the tradition since.

However, the earliest Jews and Christians do not seem to understand the concept of One Substance Trinity, but more of a Social Trinity, where the Father and Son are separate beings but one in all they do.

Spoken from a true non-Trinitarian who has a passing knowledge of Trinitarian beliefs. I thought we've gone past this Ram. You disappoint me.

[bytebear]

By the way, the D&C also uses the phrase "Father, Son and Holy Ghost, which is One God", so all the scriptures are consistent.

[livy111us]

It seems odd to me though that in the Old Testament, in the New Testament, and in the entirety of the Book of Mormon, there is no mention of God being separate beings...If something as important as this were true, shouldn't it appear somewhere else other than in Joseph Smith's revelations in the 19th century?

Heb. 5:9--“Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;”

This speaks about Christ obtaining perfection, If He were God the Father, He would have been perfect already. The New American Bible reads: “and when perfected, he became the source of eternal salvation.” The N.I.V. says: “and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey Him”

Mat. 12:32--“And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.”

If you sin against Christ, you are forgiven, but if you sin against the Holy Ghost, you are not forgiven. If they were the same person, there would also be the same punishment.

Luke 3:22--“And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.”

All three members of the Godhead were at Christs baptism.

John 14:21--These are brief examples of there separation, Christ praying to the Father (see also Mat. 26:39, 27:46, John 12:27-28, John 16:26, John 17:5-11)

John 7:16-17, 8:27-28--“Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.”

The Son teaches the Fathers doctrine, not His own (see also Luke 2:49-50, John 17:3-4)

Rev. 1:1--“The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:”

How could God give Christ revelation if they are the same?

Eph. 1:20—“Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,”

God raised Christ from the dead and set Him on His right hand. (see also Mark 16:19, Luke

22:69, 1 Peter 3:22, Rev. 3:21)

John 5:27--“For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.”

God gives Christ authority. (see also Romans 2:16, 2 Tim. 4:1)

Mat. 28:18-- These are Jesus’ words saying “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth”.

Power that is given must come from somebody else. In this case, power is given from God. How can He give power to Himself?

John 14:28---“Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.”

God is greater than Christ. (see also John 10:29, 1 Cor. 15:28)

1 Cor. 11:3-- “The head of Christ is God”. Christ is subordinate to the Father.

1 Tim. 2:5--“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ

Jesus;”

This tells us directly that there is one God and one mediator, which equals 2 people. A mediator between two parties is indeed a third party (see also John 14:6, Rom. 8:34, Heb. 7:25)

Rev. 5:7--This is a vision John is having of heaven, and he sees Christ take a book from the right hand of God. This couldn’t happen if they are one.

John 8:17-18--”It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.”

There are 2 witnesses, Jewish law specified that at least two or three witnesses were required to establish the testimony of anyone as a fact. This scripture states that Christ is one and God is the other.

John 20:17--“Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.”

We share the same Father and God. Christ Himself refers to Him as His God. There has to be a separation there. (see also Mat. 27:46, Mark 15:34, 2 Cor. 11:31, Ephesians 1:3, 1 Peter 1:3, Rev. 3:12)

Gen. 1:26, 3:22, 11:7, Isa. 6:8-- “Let us” that shows 2 people in the garden, not one only .

John 5:19-- “The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father do: for what

thingsoever He doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise”.

How could Jesus follow the Fathers lead, if He was Himself?

Acts 7:55--“But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,”

This is a great example of the divinity of them. Stephen saw Christ on the right hand of God. Acts 2:33 also

Heb. 5:5--God said to Christ “Thou art my Son, today have I begotten thee” Can you beget

yourself?

Mark 13:32--“But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.”

No one knows when the second coming will happen, not even Christ, but God only. Can God keep a secret from Himself?

Mat. 18:10-- “In heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in

heaven”

If God was in heaven during Christs ministry, there is no possible way for them to be the same person. (Mat. 5:48, 6:9, 10:33, 16:17, Luke 11:2, John 14:12, 20:17)

Luke 22:46–“Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit”

This shows that the Father and Son are not only in different places at the same time, but they also possess their own spirit.

John 14:12--“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.”

Christ returned to the Father after the resurrection (see also John 16:27-28, 30, 1 Peter 3:21-22)

Mat. 26:39-42-- “O my Father, not as I will, but as thou wilt; thy will be done” (see also Luke 22:41-42, John 5:30)

John 3:16--The Father sent His Son to the earth (see also John 5:24, 6:38, 7:28-29, 8:26, 29, 42, 12:44-45, 17:3-10, 18, 25, 20:21, Mark 9:37, 1 John 4:14)

John 14:9-- “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father”.

Yet many people saw Christ and lived.

Mat. 28:19–“baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost”

If God was only one person, he would have only commanded them to baptize in the name of God

Ignatius says that there were “some vain talkers and deceivers not Christians, but Christ-

betrayers” who “Some of them say that the Son is a mere man, and that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are but the same person, and that the creation is the work of God, not by Christ, but by some other strange power. Be on your guard, therefore, against such persons, that ye admit not of a snare for your own souls” (Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:68, chap. 6, Ignatius to the Trallians)

“Jesus commands them to baptize into the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost—not into a unipersonal God.” (Ante-Nicene Fathers 3:623, Tertullian 213 AD, W)

Edited November 13, 2013 by livy111us

[bytebear]

I see the argument for "one God" an attempt to defend against the attack of polytheism. But if the same defense works for the Trinity, it also works for the Godhead. It all becomes semantics on what a person is vs a being vs a substance. But the truth is, God is a collection. We use God mostly to mean God the Father. Even the verses above distinguish between Christ and God.

Consider this verse:

John 20:17

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

So,Jesus' Father is also Mary's Father, and Jesus' God is also Mary's God. So Jesus considers God the Father his God. Jesus has a God. And yet, they are One God.

By the way, it also means Jesus and all of mankind are brothers and sisters.

[Guest]

Okay, one more time people...

Trinitarians do not believe God is one person.

I don't know how I can make that any clearer.

[mnn727]

Okay, one more time people...

Trinitarians do not believe God is one person.

I don't know how I can make that any clearer.

Actually; Some do and some don't.

Take a survey on a Protestant website and you'll get about 50/50 -- I did this a number of years back.

[jinc1019]

By the way, the D&C also uses the phrase "Father, Son and Holy Ghost, which is One God", so all the scriptures are consistent.

This is a good point, thanks for bringing that up.

[jinc1019]

Actually, the early Jews and Christians saw God as anthropomorphic. Just look at how he is described through most of the Old Testament. Noah and Moses spoke face to face with God. And in the New Testament, we have examples of Jesus praying to the Father, Jesus' baptism showing the three separate beings, the Mount of Transfiguration showing the separate beings, Jesus at Gethsemane saying "Not my will by thine be done" showing two wills involved, and Christ on the cross asking the Father why he forsake him (a single being cannot forsake himself). Finally, Stephen the martyr of Acts saw Jesus standing on the right hand of God, who sat on his throne. Clearly anthropomorphic AND separate beings.

There are many more examples in the scriptures, but these are very clear to show that the Godhead are three physically separate beings.

Finally, who/what is more perfect: God the Father without a physical body, or Jesus Christ with a resurrected physical body?

The traditional concept of the Trinity came about only in the 2nd and 3d centuries AD, and only after many of the bishops and other church leaders began reading the scriptures through the lens of Greek philosophy. Aristotle had taught there is only one God, who is of pure spirit. He said that we cannot be like him, as we are made of impure spirit. Therefore man cannot be like God. Early Christians in the 3rd century AD argued over the Godhead.

The Nicene Creed was formed in the early 4th century from a meeting of many bishops. It was a very political event, with 3 concepts of God considered:

1. Athanasius' concept of Father, Son and Holy Ghost being one substance

2. Arius' concept that the Father and Son are separate beings, and since there is only one God, Jesus is Lord, not God.

3. Origen's concept (from a century before) that the Father and Son are both Gods, with Jesus as subordinate to the Father. Eusebius of Caesarea (historian of early church) defended this concept, but was quickly forced to be silent or be lumped in with the Arians.

Athanasius' creed ruled the day, but within a few decades it was out of favor and the Arius doctrine was favored by the Church for almost a century. St Augustine and Jerome restrengthened the concept of a Trinity, and it has been the tradition since.

However, the earliest Jews and Christians do not seem to understand the concept of One Substance Trinity, but more of a Social Trinity, where the Father and Son are separate beings but one in all they do.

I don't proclaim to be a church historian, but I am well read on these subjects and I don't totally disagree with most of your points. However, you are making the dangerous assumption that you know what the "church" believed or taught based on select writings from a select group of people. Honestly, it's very difficult to know what the majority of Christians believed on this subject prior to the 3rd century. Trinitarians would argue that it doesn't even matter whether or not most people prior to the 2nd century believed the Father and the Son were separate because all that matters is what the apostles truly taught..and what they taught has been preserved by apostolic succession. They would acknowledge that many bishops in apostolic succession disagreed with the Trinitarian view, but they would argue that the MAJORITY of bishops clearly did endorse it. If they didn't, it would never have been agreed upon.

You suggest that other motives may have been at play, and maybe you are right. I don't rule that out. It is true that the "church" and "state" were quite intertwined at that point in history. But I don't think you can definitively prove your case about the Father and the Son being separate by pointing to church documents, which seem to suggest a whole lot of things very early on that your church rejects. For instance, you can find instances very early in church history of individuals who believed in a Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharistic feast. I am talking about 2nd century quotes, with some allusions in the 1st century (Didache). However, you will also find others who endorse, quite clearly, a symbolic view in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, although I think the Real Presence view has carried more favor by that point.

My point is, early church fathers believed in all sorts of things. From universalism to eternal damnation, you can find almost any view in the early church fathers. This is why the Catholic Church ruled using a majority of its bishops who attended councils, and the majority of those bishops ruled that Trinitarian doctrine was correct and had been handed down since the apostles, either rightly or wrongly.

[jinc1019]

Heb. 5:9--“Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;”

This speaks about Christ obtaining perfection, If He were God the Father, He would have been perfect already. The New American Bible reads: “and when perfected, he became the source of eternal salvation.” The N.I.V. says: “and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey Him”

Mat. 12:32--“And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.”

If you sin against Christ, you are forgiven, but if you sin against the Holy Ghost, you are not forgiven. If they were the same person, there would also be the same punishment.

Luke 3:22--“And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.”

All three members of the Godhead were at Christs baptism.

John 14:21--These are brief examples of there separation, Christ praying to the Father (see also Mat. 26:39, 27:46, John 12:27-28, John 16:26, John 17:5-11)

John 7:16-17, 8:27-28--“Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.”

The Son teaches the Fathers doctrine, not His own (see also Luke 2:49-50, John 17:3-4)

Rev. 1:1--“The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:”

How could God give Christ revelation if they are the same?

Eph. 1:20—“Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,”

God raised Christ from the dead and set Him on His right hand. (see also Mark 16:19, Luke

22:69, 1 Peter 3:22, Rev. 3:21)

John 5:27--“For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.”

God gives Christ authority. (see also Romans 2:16, 2 Tim. 4:1)

Mat. 28:18-- These are Jesus’ words saying “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth”.

Power that is given must come from somebody else. In this case, power is given from God. How can He give power to Himself?

John 14:28---“Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.”

God is greater than Christ. (see also John 10:29, 1 Cor. 15:28)

1 Cor. 11:3-- “The head of Christ is God”. Christ is subordinate to the Father.

1 Tim. 2:5--“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ

Jesus;”

This tells us directly that there is one God and one mediator, which equals 2 people. A mediator between two parties is indeed a third party (see also John 14:6, Rom. 8:34, Heb. 7:25)

Rev. 5:7--This is a vision John is having of heaven, and he sees Christ take a book from the right hand of God. This couldn’t happen if they are one.

John 8:17-18--”It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.”

There are 2 witnesses, Jewish law specified that at least two or three witnesses were required to establish the testimony of anyone as a fact. This scripture states that Christ is one and God is the other.

John 20:17--“Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.”

We share the same Father and God. Christ Himself refers to Him as His God. There has to be a separation there. (see also Mat. 27:46, Mark 15:34, 2 Cor. 11:31, Ephesians 1:3, 1 Peter 1:3, Rev. 3:12)

Gen. 1:26, 3:22, 11:7, Isa. 6:8-- “Let us” that shows 2 people in the garden, not one only .

John 5:19-- “The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father do: for what

thingsoever He doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise”.

How could Jesus follow the Fathers lead, if He was Himself?

Acts 7:55--“But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,”

This is a great example of the divinity of them. Stephen saw Christ on the right hand of God. Acts 2:33 also

Heb. 5:5--God said to Christ “Thou art my Son, today have I begotten thee” Can you beget

yourself?

Mark 13:32--“But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.”

No one knows when the second coming will happen, not even Christ, but God only. Can God keep a secret from Himself?

Mat. 18:10-- “In heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in

heaven”

If God was in heaven during Christs ministry, there is no possible way for them to be the same person. (Mat. 5:48, 6:9, 10:33, 16:17, Luke 11:2, John 14:12, 20:17)

Luke 22:46–“Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit”

This shows that the Father and Son are not only in different places at the same time, but they also possess their own spirit.

John 14:12--“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.”

Christ returned to the Father after the resurrection (see also John 16:27-28, 30, 1 Peter 3:21-22)

Mat. 26:39-42-- “O my Father, not as I will, but as thou wilt; thy will be done” (see also Luke 22:41-42, John 5:30)

John 3:16--The Father sent His Son to the earth (see also John 5:24, 6:38, 7:28-29, 8:26, 29, 42, 12:44-45, 17:3-10, 18, 25, 20:21, Mark 9:37, 1 John 4:14)

John 14:9-- “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father”.

Yet many people saw Christ and lived.

Mat. 28:19–“baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost”

If God was only one person, he would have only commanded them to baptize in the name of God

Ignatius says that there were “some vain talkers and deceivers not Christians, but Christ-

betrayers” who “Some of them say that the Son is a mere man, and that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are but the same person, and that the creation is the work of God, not by Christ, but by some other strange power. Be on your guard, therefore, against such persons, that ye admit not of a snare for your own souls” (Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:68, chap. 6, Ignatius to the Trallians)

“Jesus commands them to baptize into the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost—not into a unipersonal God.” (Ante-Nicene Fathers 3:623, Tertullian 213 AD, W)

Again, see my comment about using the early church fathers to support a point.

[jinc1019]

I see the argument for "one God" an attempt to defend against the attack of polytheism. But if the same defense works for the Trinity, it also works for the Godhead. It all becomes semantics on what a person is vs a being vs a substance. But the truth is, God is a collection. We use God mostly to mean God the Father. Even the verses above distinguish between Christ and God.

Consider this verse:

John 20:17

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

So,Jesus' Father is also Mary's Father, and Jesus' God is also Mary's God. So Jesus considers God the Father his God. Jesus has a God. And yet, they are One God.

By the way, it also means Jesus and all of mankind are brothers and sisters.

I think the essence of your primary point here is very important. In reality, these two concepts are really not all that different. In both cases you have three in one. It's a matter of substance, as you put it.

I think where things get a lot more dicey is when Mormons and Christians start talking about what Theosis means and what happens when we die. Few traditional Christians would ever consider Jesus their brother in a literal sense the way Mormons would. Why? Because the belief that we are born first in the spirit world by heavenly parents is rather unique to Mormonism. I am sure some early church father(s) did teach this, but as I already said, you can find early church fathers to support almost any view.

[jinc1019]

One example by the way is baptism and the authority to administer it. Many early church fathers believed baptism could be done by any Christian and that no special priesthood was necessary for it. Other early church fathers outright dismissed the need for apostolic succession as it is practiced (and mandated as a necessity) in your church.

[jerome1232]

Okay, one more time people...

Trinitarians do not believe God is one person.

I don't know how I can make that any clearer.

I personally don't think anybody understands trinitarianism but that's a whole 'nother thread. I think we've done this before and wasted pages and pages on the subject. At the end of the day I decided I'll never get this three-in-one God concept. Sounds like what we believe with semantics thrown in.

[jinc1019]

I personally don't think anybody understands trinitarianism but that's a whole 'nother thread. I think we've done this before and wasted pages and pages on the subject. At the end of the day I decided I'll never get this three-in-one God concept. Sounds like what we believe with semantics thrown in.

I think it's understandable, it's just not very easy swallow. It's like the concept of infinity; it makes sense in one way and makes absolutely no sense in another.