Please can I ask your advice on finding a church to attend with my girlfriend.

[AbramM]

4 minutes ago, unixknight said:

Brother, I understand your perspective very, very well. 

I don't think you do considering that you thought my answer to your question of "Who was Jesus praying to" would be himself. When that is not my perspective at all. 

[prisonchaplain]

5 hours ago, unixknight said:

Thank you for clarifying the difference, @Maureen.  

And yeah, I have heard it explained both ways under the general category of 'trinity' from Catholic and from Protestant friends and acquaintances over the years.

Anyway, the questions I asked earlier about Gethsemane, the Cross and Jesus' Baptism were all meant to illustrate the contradiction I see between the concept of the trinity/modalism and the events as described in Scripture.

Most of the contradiction you sense is from the idea that God is speaking to Himself--a much bigger problem under modalism than in the Trinity (which recognizes 3 distinct persons, but insists they are of one essence).

[unixknight]

5 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

At this point there does seem to be an open discussion of the Trinity. Perhaps I am mistaken, but the general counsel that @AbramM has received concerning his girlfriend is to have an open, direct conversation about where she is really at (committed LDS vs. not-committed and open to traditional Christian churches). After that is resolved, @AbramM has indicated he is willing to pursue or leave her, depending on where she is spiritually.

So...if the only purpose of the Trinity discussion here is to get the OP to believe there really isn't much difference between the two beliefs, with no input from his fellow Protestants, then I would suggest that that's odd. The difference is significant. It's so significant there's been the suggestion that LDS Christianity should be seen as a whole new branch, rather than as a Protestant denomination (an Idea I agreed with, btw). Can we say it's that big, and then that it's no big deal?

Point taken.

I do think it's worth pointing out that we (meaning the LDS side) have been coming at it form two different points of view.  One side is suggesting there's very little difference, while the other is suggesting there's a BIG difference.  (I'm on the latter).  I think it's important to acknowledge the differences, especially when they're significant.

Protestantism and Orthodoxy both hold the core view of the trinity.  We use a lot of the same language and terms, as someone pointed out earlier, but we mean very different things.  From the Protestant/Catholic view, the LDS doctrine may seem downright polytheistic... and I wouldn't want to have to argue against that.  If someone tossed that accusation my way, I'd probably just shrug and say "so be it."  Meanwhile, from the LDS view, (speaking for myself and my friends with whom I've discussed the issue) the doctrine of the Trinity looks a lot like a philosophical effort to have it's doctrinal cake and eat it too.  (No offense or criticism intended, just making a point). 

So basically that core view is incredibly important, IMHO and it's understandable why it rises to the level of "worldview" and not just "belief" or "doctrine."

[Alia]

@AbramM even though, I disagree with quite a few of your beliefs. I completely understand where you are coming from as I was raised in a Baptist church. Compared to a lot of young Baptists I grew up with and that I know now, you represent your faith so well and I love seeing young people passionate about their faith.  It's something that isn't often seen. I'm sure God will provide for you. 

[unixknight]

5 minutes ago, AbramM said:

I don't think you do considering that you thought my answer to your question of "Who was Jesus praying to" would be himself. When that is not my perspective at all. 

I would have hoped that my comments/questions since then would have shown you the point of  that.  Guess not.

[prisonchaplain]

4 hours ago, Jane_Doe said:

Then you must show HOW 3 are 1, because HOW which is actual point of discussion here.  No one here is arguing that 3 are 1, in fact everyone here very much agrees on that.  

The "how" is indeed the difficulty. It is either a divine mystery that is beyond our understanding, in mortality, or it is illogical nonsense (as Orthodox Jews and Muslims contend). We know God is one. We know Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and the Father is God. To say they are only one in purpose feels like saying there are 3 God-beings. This is the Jewish/Muslim contention--that Trinity is really Tri-theism. We reject that and insist we worship one God. LDS theology pushes this further, insisting that worshipping 3 God-beings with one purpose is also worshipping one God, and is monotheism. Trinitarians struggle with that because we know that saying it's a divine mystery demands faith. The LDS answer feels, to us, like admitting the Muslims/Jews are right about us.

[prisonchaplain]

3 hours ago, Jane_Doe said:

In order to show that the Trinity is Biblical, you must cites verses talking about HOW they are 1.  Their substance, this "being" vs "person" idea, etc.  

It's the HOW that is the discussion here.  Not the fact that the Father, Son, Spirit are 3 persons in 1 God-- that's completely agreed upon.

The Bible does not always explain the HOW. How did God actually carry out his creation of the world? That is not explained very much at all. How are the 3 also 1. The Bible says it is so, without really going into the details of the nature of God. We believe many truths without knowing the details. Why this insistence?

[Jane_Doe]

18 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

The "how" is indeed the difficulty. It is either a divine mystery that is beyond our understanding, in mortality, or it is illogical nonsense (as Orthodox Jews and Muslims contend). We know God is one. We know Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and the Father is God. To say they are only one in purpose feels like saying there are 3 God-beings. This is the Jewish/Muslim contention--that Trinity is really Tri-theism. We reject that and insist we worship one God. LDS theology pushes this further, insisting that worshipping 3 God-beings with one purpose is also worshipping one God, and is monotheism. Trinitarians struggle with that because we know that saying it's a divine mystery demands faith. The LDS answer feels, to us, like admitting the Muslims/Jews are right about us.

You should never feel bad about acknowledging that the Father, Son, and Spirit are 3 different persons.  Neither Trinitarians nor LDS Christians are both monotheists, even if it isn't the extremely simply monotheism of Judism or Islam.  If other people fail to understand that... frankly that's doesn't change the truth that both LDS Christians and Trinitarians are monotheists. 

Edited March 27, 2019 by Jane_Doe

[AbramM]

1 minute ago, prisonchaplain said:

The Bible does not always explain the HOW. How did God actually carry out his creation of the world? That is not explained very much at all. How are the 3 also 1. The Bible says it is so, without really going into the details of the nature of God. We believe many truths without knowing the details. Why this insistence?

I tried to explain the same thing earlier with the same example of God creating the world. You're just so much more articulate than me and I bet you have more swagger in real life than that photo of yours.

 

[prisonchaplain]

2 hours ago, estradling75 said:

A belief that you can not back up with biblical scriptures...  Which is fine... But when you choose to judge someone else Christianity and relationship with God... You need more then "because they disagree with me" as a reason

Actually @Maureen did that for him. There are many verses that declare the oneness of God. There are also verses that identify the Father as God, the Son as God, and the Holy Spirit as God. So 3 are 1. It's the HOW that the Bible does not explain.

[AbramM]

14 minutes ago, Alia said:

@AbramM even though, I disagree with quite a few of your beliefs. I completely understand where you are coming from as I was raised in a Baptist church. Compared to a lot of young Baptists I grew up with and that I know now, you represent your faith so well and I love seeing young people passionate about their faith.  It's something that isn't often seen. I'm sure God will provide for you. 

Thank you 😀.

I would be able to tell you used to be a Baptist even if you hadn't of told me. You quoted a beatitude to cheer me up. It's the most baptist thing ever, someone is sad, find the beatitude that matches their situation the most and say it to them 😂

Edited March 27, 2019 by AbramM

[Jane_Doe]

2 hours ago, AbramM said:

Yes how can I be married to someone who has different beliefsabout God.

I'm going to recap the situation thus far as I'm seeing it (spoiler alert: this ends with me saying that this is your walk with God, your relationship with a girl, and your choice).

1) You, Abram, believe that the Father, Son, and Spirit are 3 persons and 1 being.

2) You do not know what this means, nor do you have any scriptural verses explaining it, nor had you ever deeply thought about it until this week.

3)  And you are ok with that and do not feel the need to ask those questions.  You specially back away from them.  

4) And you are not ok with someone else believing every verse of the Bible, but having a different answer to those same "how are they one" questions (the ones you're ok not having answers to).

5)  You such a person judge them as having a different faith and being unfit to marry.  

Ok, this is your walk with God, your relationship with a girl, and your choice.  Sit down, listen to what it is she believes and her answers to those "how" questions.  If you then judge that difference as being an unreconcilable deal breaker, then let her know you have judged thus, and leave the conversation as a single man.    

[prisonchaplain]

17 minutes ago, unixknight said:

 Meanwhile, from the LDS view, (speaking for myself and my friends with whom I've discussed the issue) the doctrine of the Trinity looks a lot like a philosophical effort to have it's doctrinal cake and eat it too.  (No offense or criticism intended, just making a point). 

First, I hope you caught that I loved the entirety of your post. There can be no offense taking at your perspective, because it is the same view (kind version) that Jews and Muslims hold towards us. Our appeal to the Bible works better on LDS that those other two religions, though. :-)  We see the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit each described as God in scripture. We see the famous declaration of Deuteronomy 6:4--that God is one. And, we conclude that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the one God. 3 persons, each described separately, yet one God. So, why insist that the oneness is more than in purpose? You already answered that. We would loathe to be considered polytheists. We truly believe that on some essential level the three are truly one.

[prisonchaplain]

12 minutes ago, AbramM said:

I tried to explain the same thing earlier with the same example of God creating the world. You're just so much more articulate than me and I bet you have more swagger in real life than that photo of yours.

 

It might just be because I am old.

[Jane_Doe]

17 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

The Bible does not always explain the HOW. How did God actually carry out his creation of the world? That is not explained very much at all. How are the 3 also 1. The Bible says it is so, without really going into the details of the nature of God. We believe many truths without knowing the details. Why this insistence?

Such a stance (which is actually sola scriptura) then concludes that there is no difference between LDS Christian views and this surface version of the Trinity.  The LDS Christian view shouldn't be a problem at all for Protestants.  Hence why (for example) my view is not a problem for my Baptist husband we don't have an disagreements.  

However, the full theology Trinity DOES answer the how (specifying in the Creeds), and that's the point of disagreement.  

Edited March 27, 2019 by Jane_Doe

[AbramM]

4 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

You do not know what this means, nor do you have any scriptural verses explaining it, nor had you ever deeply thought about it until this week.

3)  And you are ok with that and do not feel the need to ask those questions.  You specially back away from them.  

4) And you are not ok with someone else believing every verse of the Bible, but having a different answer to those same "how are they one" questions (the ones you're ok not having answers to).

I tried my best to explain what I believe. I did give verses to explain what I believe. I never claimed to be a scholar and I wasn't expecting to have to defend what I believe. 

I have had lots of discussions about the trinity before. It's something I firmly believe in and I have questioned it. I came to believe in the trinity for myself when I was 9 years old. 

 

 

[Jane_Doe]

15 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

Actually @Maureen did that for him. There are many verses that declare the oneness of God. There are also verses that identify the Father as God, the Son as God, and the Holy Spirit as God. So 3 are 1. It's the HOW that the Bible does not explain.

And it's the HOW where the disgrrement between LDS Christians and Trinitarians lies. 

[AbramM]

2 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

And it's the HOW where the disgrrement between LDS Christians and Trinitarians lies. 

We don't believe the 3 persons are one in purpose. We believe they are one being one on essence. 

Edited March 27, 2019 by AbramM

[Jane_Doe]

Just now, AbramM said:

I tried my best to explain what I believe. I did give verses to explain what I believe. I never claimed to be a scholar and I wasn't expecting to have to defend what I believe. 

I have had lots of discussions about the trinity before. It's something I firmly believe in and I have questioned it. I came to believe in the trinity for myself when I was 9 years old. 

HOW are they one?  You have not given any verses to that question (nor does the Bible have any to give).  You specifically said that you don't need to know that answer.   And yet it is that question that is the differences between the two beliefs and the declaration that an LDS Christian has a different faith.  

Which all your choice.  It's your walk with God, your relationship with the girl, and your choice of beliefs.  

[prisonchaplain]

6 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

I'm going to recap the situation thus far as I'm seeing it (spoiler alert: this ends with me saying that this is your walk with God, your relationship with a girl, and your choice).

1) You, Abram, believe that the Father, Son, and Spirit are 3 persons and 1 being.

2) You do not know what this means, nor do you have any scriptural verses explaining it, nor had you ever deeply thought about it until this week.

3)  And you are ok with that and do not feel the need to ask those questions.  You specially back away from them.  

4) And you are not ok with someone else believing every verse of the Bible, but having a different answer to those same "how are they one" questions (the ones you're ok not having answers to).

5)  You such a person judge them as having a different faith and being unfit to marry.  

Ok, this is your walk with God, your relationship with a girl, and your choice.  Sit down, listen to what it is she believes and her answers to those "how" questions.  If you then judge that difference as being an unreconcilable deal breaker, then let her know you have judged thus, and leave the conversation as a single man.    

Honestly, in reading the back and forth, it felt like @AbramM was being cajoled into a conversation he repeatedly said he did not want to have. He has his faith, is committed, and demonstrates a pretty solid understanding. He has not had experience with LDS folk, did not want to engage in an interfaith debate at a predominantly LDS public platform, and yet did attempt to engage in your questions. His goal is to find a woman he can serve the LORD with, and to avoid being "unequally yoked," with one who does not share the same faith. I doubt any here would contend that LDS and Protestants believe the same things, and that the differences are mostly semantics. So, why call a 20-year old judgmental etc.? He's exercising spiritually healthy caution about one of the most important decisions he will ever make. I respect him greatly.

[Jane_Doe]

1 minute ago, AbramM said:

We don't believe the 3 persons are one in purpose. We believe they are one being one on essence. 

Yes, that is the two different how's: via unity, or via consubstantiation.   Both answers reaching beyond what's simply written in the Bible.  This does require study.

[Jane_Doe]

6 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

Honestly, in reading the back and forth, it felt like @AbramM was being cajoled into a conversation he repeatedly said he did not want to have. He has his faith, is committed, and demonstrates a pretty solid understanding. He has not had experience with LDS folk, did not want to engage in an interfaith debate at a predominantly LDS public platform, and yet did attempt to engage in your questions. His goal is to find a woman he can serve the LORD with, and to avoid being "unequally yoked," with one who does not share the same faith. I doubt any here would contend that LDS and Protestants believe the same things, and that the differences are mostly semantics. So, why call a 20-year old judgmental etc.? He's exercising spiritually healthy caution about one of the most important decisions he will ever make. I respect him greatly.

Hence my statement: "If you then judge that difference as being an unreconcilable deal breaker, then let her know you have judged thus, and leave the conversation as a single man."   

Inter-faith marriages are a LOT of work.  I know that first hand, even though I am extremely happily married.  I respect Abram's dedication to his faith.   If he finds the difference to be unreconcilable, he should break up.  

Edited March 27, 2019 by Jane_Doe

[prisonchaplain]

7 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

Such a stance (which is actually sola scriptura) then concludes that there is no difference between LDS Christian views and this surface version of the Trinity.  The LDS Christian view shouldn't be a problem at all for Protestants.  Hence why (for example) my view is not a problem for my Baptist husband we don't have an disagreements.  

However, the full theology Trinity DOES answer the how (specifying in the Creeds), and that's the point of disagreement.  

I suspect that AbramM is not too dependent on the creeds. I avoid referring to them, as well. The Trinity requires believing God does not reveal the full details of his nature to our limited understanding. I know enough about God that I have peace with this level of mystery. The LDS Godhead explains more, but seems to cross a line between monotheism and polytheism (call it henotheism, if that's better). I get that LDS do not think so, and part of that is belief in the latter-day revelations. Without those, 3 persons united on an essential level, as one God is as far as we can go.

[Alia]

13 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

1) You, Abram, believe that the Father, Son, and Spirit are 3 persons and 1 being.

 2) You do not know what this means, nor do you have any scriptural verses explaining it, nor had you ever deeply thought about it until this week.

I think you're out of order. Abram has demonstrated that he does know what this means and even if he hasn't managed to demonstrate that to you, that doesn't give you the right to tell him he doesn't know what it means. The impression I have from the posts I have read is that Abram has considered these things before. 

 

16 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

3)  And you are ok with that and do not feel the need to ask those questions.  You specially back away from them.  

I think at one point Abram even said he didn't feel comfortable talking about what he believes in this forum and yet when questioned he answered. I don't think it is fair to say he backed away from the questions asked. So it is illogical to conclude that he would back away from asking them. 

 

18 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

 4) And you are not ok with someone else believing every verse of the Bible, but having a different answer to those same "how are they one" questions (the ones you're ok not having answers to).

 

Abram has tried to point out it isn't the "How", it is the belief. Not how the belief is rationalised but what that belief means for his faith. If it is the foundation of his faith as he claims it makes sense that he would want to marry someone who shares that foundation. 

 

19 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

 5)  You such a person judge them as having a different faith and being unfit to marry.  

 

I don't think he is being judgemental. 

[Jane_Doe]

5 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

I suspect that AbramM is not too dependent on the creeds. I avoid referring to them, as well. The Trinity requires believing God does not reveal the full details of his nature to our limited understanding. I know enough about God that I have peace with this level of mystery. The LDS Godhead explains more, but seems to cross a line between monotheism and polytheism (call it henotheism, if that's better). I get that LDS do not think so, and part of that is belief in the latter-day revelations. Without those, 3 persons united on an essential level, as one God is as far as we can go.

The minute a person defines "being" and "person" to be two different things, or talks about essense/substance, they are doctrinally citing the Creeds.  You cannot avoid that while talking about the concept of the Trinity.  It shouldn't make anyone uncomfortable to just come out and say that.  In fact, I would consider such to be essential to understanding Protestant teachings.  (Note: that's not meant to be insulting at all, please don't remotely take it that way).

Edited March 27, 2019 by Jane_Doe