Sign in to follow this  
Mores

A Single Conversation With a Single Baptist

Recommended Posts

I thought it would be interesting to share and more interesting to get comments on a conversation I just had with a friend of mine.  It is a single conversation. And it was with just one person.  But I found it an informative one.

He's a Baptist.  But he's not particular about which particular group he attends church with.  He'll go with Southern Baptists or General Baptist or Evangelical Baptist. He just goes to the group he likes.

I felt I'd gotten to trust him enough to ask him about the Trinity.  What is it?  And I wanted to know if he simply grew up with the idea and that's how he got to understand it or if there was a point where he did not understand it but at some point he finally "got it."  If so, how does someone outside the faith ever have a hope of understanding what it is.

He said he was raised as a Baptist.  And he just grew up with the concept always there.  He said the familiar line -- Three beings but one God.  Then he went on to explain how it was represented in the Bible...

I interrupted and said,"I'm not really trying to prove or disprove.  I believe that is a matter of faith.  I'm just trying to figure out what it actually IS."  He gave some analogies that didn't really say much to me. 

Then he asked me what the LDS belief is.  I said,"If we were able to hypothetically surprise God and open the veil of heaven and look at God, we would see three people as individual as the three people at this table today.  But they interchange their roles so much and their power, authority, and knowledge are so intertwined that when speaking with one, we may as well be speaking to any of them."

He agreed, "That's what I believe too."  Amazing.  I then said that most Trinitarians would say he was a heretic.  He agreed.  So, then what makes you a Christian? "I believe in the five solas."  OK.  I found that odd.

So, what is it that defines a Christian to protestant faiths?  I was told that if you didn't believe in the Trinity, then you're not Christian.  So, therefore Mormons are not Christians.  Well, this friend does not seem to believe in the Trinity.  But he claims the label of "Christian" by claiming the 5 solas.  But some "Christian" sects don't believe in those either.  So, what's up with this?

BTW, I'm having a meeting in a few days with someone who came from LDS to another faith.  I'm not sure what faith he's subscribing to now.  I'll ask him.  Maybe he'll be able to explain it to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, the five solas

http://protestantism.co.uk/solas

By these descriptions, the Latter-day Saints qualify.   Specifically, they describe the difference between Justification and Sanctification.  As per their definitions, we agree.

The Sola Scriptura per their definition, explanation, and qualifiers, we agree.

The other three, I would hope everyone agrees without explanation or condition that we agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

Imagine my disappointment when I discovered that this was not yet another, "I met this really cool person, but s/he happened to be Baptist . . . "  :oops:

I was wondering if my use of the word "single" would be interpreted as "A Mormon and a Baptist walk into a singles dry bar..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mores said:

I was wondering if my use of the word "single" would be interpreted as "A Mormon and a Baptist walk into a singles dry bar..."

And after they each downed three Postum & Tonics they came to an agreement on the nature of God . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, prisonchaplain said:

And after they each downed three Postum & Tonics they came to an agreement on the nature of God . . .

Hah.

But curiously, is coffee a mixing ingredient with any common alcoholic beverages?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mores said:

Hah.

But curiously, is coffee a mixing ingredient with any common alcoholic beverages?

I'm not supposed to know about Irish Coffee...but I understand it has Bailey's Irish Cream (alcoholic) in it.

Then there's Kahlua, which is a coffee-flavored liquor that can be used with either vodka or milk.

Edited by prisonchaplain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

I'm not supposed to know about Irish Coffee...but I understand it has Bailey's Irish Cream (alcoholic) in it.

Then there's Kahlua, which is a coffee-flavored liquor that can be used with either vodka or milk.

Thanks.

Yeah, I just asked a couple guys at the office.  They mentioned the first two.  They didn't think about Kahlua.  But I do recall that being a thing.

As I recall most Baptists have a prohibition of alcohol as well.  Don't Pentecostals have such a prohibition as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disclaimer: these response are from my experiences, visiting dozens of different churches, and doing my best to understand & love the people inside.  But I'm not infallible or a mind reader by any stretch of the imagination.  

1 hour ago, Mores said:

I interrupted and said,"I'm not really trying to prove or disprove.  I believe that is a matter of faith.  I'm just trying to figure out what it actually IS."  He gave some analogies that didn't really say much to me. 

Then he asked me what the LDS belief is.  I said,"If we were able to hypothetically surprise God and open the veil of heaven and look at God, we would see three people as individual as the three people at this table today.  But they interchange their roles so much and their power, authority, and knowledge are so intertwined that when speaking with one, we may as well be speaking to any of them."

He agreed, "That's what I believe too."  Amazing.  I then said that most Trinitarians would say he was a heretic.  He agreed. 

To be completely blunt here: the term "Trinity" is defined many different ways within Trinitarian churches.  There is a formal definition, which is the one that LDS folks disagree with.  But in my experience, if you ask 10 Trinitarians "what is the Trinity", you'll get 13 different answers, and the only ones that agree with each other are the 4 folks who said "I don't know".  

Honestly, I find that due to these horribly muddy definitions, this really isn't that productive of a conversation to have.

1 hour ago, Mores said:

So, then what makes you a Christian? "I believe in the five solas."  OK.  I found that odd.

So, what is it that defines a Christian to protestant faiths?  I was told that if you didn't believe in the Trinity, then you're not Christian. 

"What makes a person a Christian" is another question you'll get a lot of different answer to.  The most common one (which is also the one that LDS Christians believe) is "I accept Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior".    If you actually ask, only a small minority believe that it's by passing a theology test (such as being able to correctly explain the Trinity). 

This conversation is actually fairly productive to have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most Trinitarians know that God is three persons but one God. They know Jesus is God. They know the Holy Spirit is God. They know the Father is God. They know the three are distinct, yet they are one. So, when LDS ask questions like, "But was Jesus praying to himself in the Garden?" the answer is, "Of course not!" "Oh, so you agree with us that they are separate?" Confusion arises very quickly at this point. I'll lay this out again:

Muslims/Jews/Jehovah's Witnesses: God is one and Jesus is not God.

Modalists: God is one. Jesus is God. He reveals himself in 3 modes--as Father, Son or Holy Spirit. (Some summarize this as God being 1 in 3).

Trinitarians: God is one. Jesus is God. So is the Father. So is the Spirit. They are distinct, but still they are one all the way down to their essence. How this is so is beyond us, but there it is.

LDS Godhead: God is one. Jesus is God. So is the Father. So is the Spirit. They are separate. What unites them is their purpose. Yet, this unity of purpose is so strong we can be called monotheists.

Modalists have a hard time explaining how the different persons can exist simultaneously and interact if they are all just Jesus.

Trinitarians have a hard time explaining how God can be 3 and 1 at the same time.

LDS have a hard time explaining how 3 beings can exist at the same time--in different bodies--and still be so one that it qualifies as monotheism. The difficulty is compounded by the doctrine of exaltation.

Of course the Muslims, Jews and Jehovah's Witnesses think Trinitarians aren't truly monotheistic either. 

Edited by prisonchaplain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mores said:

He agreed, "That's what I believe too."  Amazing.  I then said that most Trinitarians would say he was a heretic.  He agreed.  

Most Trinitarians wouldn't say he was a heretic.  Most Trinitarians who have a nebulous understanding of the Trinity might say he was a heretic.  The question isn't that there are 3 individual personages in the Trinity as it is the exact same personages as the LDS Faith.  It is what each of the personages would look like.  But since the LDS actually only have a testified understanding of a body of flesh of bone (because there's no such thing walking around the world that we can point to as - that, that's how that looks like, we simply base our understanding of it from what Joseph Smith saw) and with the Holy Spirit not having flesh and bone, how he would look like would also be just testimony.  So we are in the same boat as the Trinitarians on that account who base their understanding of how the personages would look like from testimonies in scripture.

Where Trinitarians and LDS differ is HOW the 3 personages are One God.  In LDS understanding - what makes them one is not their physical substance - so it's not something we can see.  In Trinitarian understanding what makes them one is their God substance.  But since there is only one entity in the entire existence that has that substance and we can't see that substance unless we actually get to be sanctified for the beatific vision of the One God (and not just a manifestation of a personage of that God), then Trinitarians have no idea what that substance actually is - not even by testimony.  It all hinges on Faith alone.  So, the Trinitarians and the LDS are also in the same boat on that one.

 

4 hours ago, Mores said:

So, then what makes you a Christian? "I believe in the five solas."  OK.  I found that odd.

The Five Solas is not what makes him a Christian.  The Five Solas is what makes him a Protestant.

 

 

And just FYI:  I'm a Roman Catholic convert to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who was born to a Trinitarian family but had to go through self-discovery in Catholic Schools to understand the Trinity.

 

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mores said:

So, then what makes you a Christian? "I believe in the five solas."  OK.  I found that odd.

When I put "Are Catholics Christians?" -- Most of the reasons given by the counter-cult ministries that Catholics are not Christians seem rooted in the 5 solas. As Anatess notes, that's more about being Protestant -- not necessarily Christian.

Maybe an interesting side note -- listening to Erwin Lutzers radio show a week or so ago, during the Q&A portion, he fielded a question from someone who pointedly asked if Catholicism is a cult. What I thought was interesting is that he did not simply say, "no." His answer was more about it depends on how you define cult and if you define cult certain ways then Catholicism may indeed be a cult.

I don't think I understand the nature of God very well. 3 in 1, 1 in 3, perfect unity but separate beings/personalities. Whatever the exact nature of God is, it seems so far removed from my own mortal experience that I'm not really sure I like the way we tend to argue and try to exclude each other over something that seems so difficult to really understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mores said:

...Then he asked me what the LDS belief is.  I said,"If we were able to hypothetically surprise God and open the veil of heaven and look at God, we would see three people as individual as the three people at this table today.  But they interchange their roles so much and their power, authority, and knowledge are so intertwined that when speaking with one, we may as well be speaking to any of them."

He agreed, "That's what I believe too."  Amazing.  I then said that most Trinitarians would say he was a heretic.  He agreed.  So, then what makes you a Christian? "I believe in the five solas."  OK.  I found that odd.

So, what is it that defines a Christian to protestant faiths?  I was told that if you didn't believe in the Trinity, then you're not Christian.  So, therefore Mormons are not Christians.  Well, this friend does not seem to believe in the Trinity.  But he claims the label of "Christian" by claiming the 5 solas.  But some "Christian" sects don't believe in those either.  So, what's up with this?...

I think if you would have taken the time to mention that you believe that God the Father has a physical body of flesh and bones, your friend would not have said "That's what I believe too."

M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/25/2019 at 8:45 PM, Maureen said:

I think if you would have taken the time to mention that you believe that God the Father has a physical body of flesh and bones, your friend would not have said "That's what I believe too."

M.

I'd agree.  But I'm not sure what point you're making given the context.  I was wondering about what the Trinity actually is.  If you're saying that a necessary component of the belief in the Trinity is the belief that God has no body, then that would certainly be more alien to a Latter-day Saint.  But my friend's impression was that (again, if we were to hypothetically "surprise" God) He would appear to be human in form.  What chemical or physical composition of that form is even unknown to Latter-day Saints.  So, we would again agree that "we don't know".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I had that meeting with the friend who used to be LDS.  Here's a recap of the conversation, if anyone is interested.  DISCLAIMER: It became obvious (as indicated below) that he didn't really believe what Trinitarians believe even though he has chosen to attend those churches.  But I just had to wonder what an outsider's experience is like when trying to accept the Trinity.

Quote

M: So, how long ago did you leave the Church?
F: I went inactive around 2003 and became an atheist for several years.  But I found that they didn't make sense either.  I wandered in and out of faith for several years. I finally sent in my letter of resignation around 2012 or so. I needed the closure.

M: Where do you attend now?
F: Just a local pastor.  Not any organized religion. My wife and I chose this church because we like the guy's sermons.

M:(I proceeded to tell him about that past conversation with my Baptist friend).  So, have you found through these years that you can understand the Trinity?  Do you believe it?
F: No.  It just plain doesn't make any sense.  They don't understand it either.  But it doesn't matter.  As you say it is a matter of faith.  It doesn't need to make sense.

M:So, you still believe in the Godhead?
F: Not really.  I mean it is pretty clear to me that they are three separate people.  And when you really get down to it, Trinitarians believe it too.  But to admit it would mean they are polytheists.  And none of them wants to say that.  So, that's what it's really about.  When you talk casually they pretty much see them as three people.  It's only when you want clear definitions with deep doctrinal analysis or get into a debate with a Mormon that they refuse to admit that.  If you read Christ's words, it is pretty clear he's not the same as the Father or the Spirit.  But throughout the Old Testament the Jews just had it hammered into their heads "One God! One God!" so much that Christianity just picked it up and refuse to acknowledge this idea that there could be more than one Divine Being.  It's like saying they believe in the Godhead that is "magically" a single being.  Which, if you think about it, we don't really know what God is like anyway -- even with the Godhead.  So, what's the point?

M: It seems you still believe a lot of what the Church teaches.  So, why are you subscribing to other beliefs?
F: Well, remember that I only like the guy's sermons (He proceeded to tell me about some rather disturbing findings when he went behind the scenes).  It's not really about "the true church".  I just don't go for that.  I can't accept the Joseph Smith story.  And you know I'm liberal.  So, I feel like I don't fit in.  But, yes, the Church seems to have answers to a lot more questions about God and the afterlife than any other faith that I've looked into.  But things like polygamy, blacks and the priesthood, and evolution, some things prophets have said.  I just couldn't accept it anymore.  And besides, I seem to have trouble giving up smoking and drinking.  So...

It sounds as if he's still hanging on to the Godhead belief without really believing in the Godhead.  But at the same time, he simply can't find any sense in the Trinity.  I was figuring this would be one probable outcome.  I'm guessing the Trinity is something that you pretty much have to grow up with to understand.  And even then, most don't understand it.

What surprised me was his assessment that most Trinitarians believe that they are three separate beings.  They just don't want to side with Mormons.  Yes, just one person's assessment after only about 10 years looking into other faiths.  But revealing nonetheless.

Edited by Mores

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mores said:

I'd agree.  But I'm not sure what point you're making given the context.  I was wondering about what the Trinity actually is.  If you're saying that a necessary component of the belief in the Trinity is the belief that God has no body, then that would certainly be more alien to a Latter-day Saint.  But my friend's impression was that (again, if we were to hypothetically "surprise" God) He would appear to be human in form.  What chemical or physical composition of that form is even unknown to Latter-day Saints.  So, we would again agree that "we don't know".

In Trinitarian belief, the personage of The Father and The Holy Spirit are both personages of spirit.  Jesus Christ took on bodily form being the personage who is fully human while being fully divine.  Whether the Father and the Holy Spirit, when beheld with human eyes are going to look human, Trinitarians don't know - they can speculate Yes and not be contradictory to Trinitarian teaching.  But what is clear is that during Jesus Christ's baptism, the Father was beheld as a voice from heaven and the Spirit was beheld as a dove.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

In Trinitarian belief, the personage of The Father and The Holy Spirit are both personages of spirit.  Jesus Christ took on bodily form being the personage who is fully human while being fully divine.  Whether the Father and the Holy Spirit, when beheld with human eyes are going to look human, Trinitarians don't know - they can speculate Yes and not be contradictory to Trinitarian teaching.  But what is clear is that during Jesus Christ's baptism, the Father was beheld as a voice from heaven and the Spirit was beheld as a dove.

A very long winded way of saying "We don't know".  Thank you for confirming what I said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mores said:

A very long winded way of saying "We don't know".  Thank you for confirming what I said.

Contrary to what your friend said about Trinitarians not understanding it either - this is incorrect.  Trinitarians do know.  As much as the LDS  claims they know.  Trinitarians believing in each of the personages as having individual centers of consciousness, fully God, and all 3 still be one God is not confusing or contradictory or anything of the sort just as much as the LDS belief in each of the 3 personages existing in one God is confusing or contradictory or anything of the sort.  The LDS has no problem going on that pulpit on first Sunday declaring "I know..." even as they couldn't give you the chemical composition of a Divine Body.  Same thing as Trinitarians - they can declare that they know each of the 3 personages exist in one ousia that is God even as they cannot tell you the chemical composition of that ousia.  Your friend, having a nebulous understanding of the Godhead is not surprising to also have a nebulous understanding of the Trinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Mores said:

I'd agree.  But I'm not sure what point you're making given the context.  I was wondering about what the Trinity actually is.  If you're saying that a necessary component of the belief in the Trinity is the belief that God has no body, then that would certainly be more alien to a Latter-day Saint.  But my friend's impression was that (again, if we were to hypothetically "surprise" God) He would appear to be human in form.  What chemical or physical composition of that form is even unknown to Latter-day Saints.  So, we would again agree that "we don't know".

In your first post you describe to your friend God as three "people". The trinity is described as 3 "persons" in 1 God. Your friend may well have understood the word "people" as close enough to "persons" that he didn't need to point out the distintion. You may have visualized "human" in your "people" word but a trinitarian would not so easily go there. Next time you see your friend, be more specific in describing your Godhead and see if he actually agrees with you.

M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Mores said:

What surprised me was his assessment that most Trinitarians believe that they are three separate beings.  They just don't want to side with Mormons.  Yes, just one person's assessment after only about 10 years looking into other faiths.  But revealing nonetheless.

None of this is so surprising to me. This person was LDS, and still sees through that lense. A few LDS perceive that Trinitarians teach that God is one person in three roles (which is actually modalism, a minority belief, considered heresy by most traditional Christians). So, when a trinitarian says that we do believe in three DISTINCT persons, the perception is that we therefore believe the Godhead teaching. It's a wrong understanding. We agree that Father, Son and Spirit are distinct, but we insist they are of one essence.

It also does not surprise me that this person perceives trinitarians just refuse to accept LDS teaching. Again, he was one. He sees the division as centering on the LDS Godhead vs. the Trinity. Historically, the argument was between the Trinity and the subordinationists (today, Jehovah's Witness best exemplify this view). Modalism came somewhat later. I'm not sure that the LDS Godhead was proposed during those early discussions/debates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@prisonchaplain, would it be fair to conceptualize the trinity (and obviously this isn’t technically accurate; but as a paradigm a human can begin to wrap their minds around) as identical triplets who are  literally made of the same substance (hydrocarbons) and share the same DNA—and are telepathically linked into a sort of hive-mind (all of which might give an observer legitimate cause to call them “one”)—but who are nevertheless three distinct individuals, any one of which may manifest separately from the others?

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Maureen said:

In your first post you describe to your friend God as three "people". The trinity is described as 3 "persons" in 1 God. Your friend may well have understood the word "people" as close enough to "persons" that he didn't need to point out the distintion. You may have visualized "human" in your "people" word but a trinitarian would not so easily go there. Next time you see your friend, be more specific in describing your Godhead and see if he actually agrees with you.

M.

There is a difference between the "definitional" and "doctrinal" vs. the "common way people normally think".

I just went and asked my Baptist co-worker about it.  And, yes, when getting into the details and doctrines and beliefs, he went back to the language of "persons".  But I delved deeper and asked not about the doctrines or written words of the creeds, but about his personal instinctive practice.  What do you do?  What do you visualize when praying (for example)?

Quote

When looking in the Bible, we don't really have any description of the Father's physical form other than a burning bush. Jesus is the only one we know of as having a physical form.  So, when praying to Jesus I visualize a generic man.  And the Holy Spirit?  Who knows what a spirit is?

I had to ask to get away from a textbook for a minute and ask him about his own instincts and reflexes.  Going back to my hypothetical, if we were to somehow "surprise" God and open the windows of heaven, forget about any written words or what the talking points are.  What is YOUR instinct?  What do you reflexively, without consideration or any thought, do by habit?  In such a hypothetical, would you envision three "objects" or one?  And what do those objects look like?

Quote

Well, yeah. I'd have to visualize three objects.  And, yes, they would look like some kind of human shape or form.

So, the doctrines of the Trinity are the doctrines of the Trinity.  And if you have a deep conviction it is true, I'm not going to condemn or make fun of it. It is your belief.  And you're not going to convince me it's true either.  That isn't what it is about.

I was shifting my investigation to: "whatever that definition is" how do people interact with that doctrine in an every day basis.  What is the actual belief in action? For him, it means thinking of three "people".  I'm not trying to prove anything here. I'm wanting to get into the mind of the Trinitarian regarding their worship just for the sake of better understanding.  Your practice may be different.  But I would venture to guess that even Trinitarians will (simply because it is the human thing to do) revert to visualizing a wizened man sitting on a throne or some such.

The difference is that the idea of seeing three "humanoid" figures is something completely different to your way of thinking.  As I asked my co-worker about seeing all three, he had difficulty thinking of seeing three people.  He proceeded to describe what he does with them one at a time.  But as I tuned in a little finer and asked if he were to visualize all three "persons" at a single moment in the same place, what would he instinctively visualize?  One person or three? He had to take a moment to consider.  Finally, he said,"I guess I would picture three human figures standing next to each other."

The fact that he both took a moment to consider it, as well as his final admission of what he would visualize, was a learning experience for both of us.

Edited by Mores

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

None of this is so surprising to me. This person was LDS, and still sees through that lense.

I certainly considered that during my interview with him.  But still, he has been actively away from the Church for going on 20 years.  He was searching for several years.  And he finally settled down and chose to adhere to mainstream Christian beliefs for about 10 years or so.  He's actively been trying to find what others actually think and believe so that he could understand it and believe it himself.  But no one ever offered him anything he could believe.

Please understand that one thing I was trying to determine is if it would be possible for someone who had not simply "grown up with it" to actually understand and believe the doctrine of the Trinity.  In his case, it appears that it was not possible.  But he still hangs around anyway.

9 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

A few LDS perceive that Trinitarians teach that God is one person in three roles (which is actually modalism, a minority belief, considered heresy by most traditional Christians).

Well, apparently, most mainstream Christians are also heretics.  I've specifically heard the modalism definition as their explanation of the Trinity.  Yet they ignorantly claim that they believe in the Trinity. When I point out that their description is called "modalism", they are surprised and admit they've never heard of it.  I've mentioned to a few of them that it is often considered heresy among Trinitarians.  They scoffed at the notion.

Again, I realize that not all mainstream Christians are trained as much as a pastor or minister.  But this sure seems central to the disagreement between sectarians and Latter-day Saints.  And to have sectarians unable to describe or even agree on the meaning of the Trinity is kind of confusing to us outsiders who are simply trying to understand it.

9 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

So, when a trinitarian says that we do believe in three DISTINCT persons, the perception is that we therefore believe the Godhead teaching. It's a wrong understanding. We agree that Father, Son and Spirit are distinct, but we insist they are of one essence.

That's the language I keep hearing.  But every time I delve deeper into asking what that really means, we end up with a description of the Godhead or an idea that is a "mystery".  I've honestly tried to understand.  I'm really not trying to criticize.  I understand it is a deeply held belief.  And I don't want to shame you for your deeply held belief.  It's your faith, not mine.

But I'm very interested in learning everything. I just don't understand what it is other than the Godhead or something people can't describe (all my discussions end up with those two results).  I'm amazed at how much Trinitarians are describing the Godhead when they try to explain the Trinity to me.  I'd like to know what the difference is.  And when they make a clear distinct line, then they struggle to define what it actually is.

The thing is that I believe that's perfectly fine.  God is of a nature that we cannot understand.  That is perfectly acceptable.  I see no problem with that.  Why would there be?

Perhaps the truth is that the actual nature of God is something we will never know in this life.  But in practice, our limited human minds will have to "visualize" something.  Why not the Godhead?

9 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

It also does not surprise me that this person perceives trinitarians just refuse to accept LDS teaching. Again, he was one. He sees the division as centering on the LDS Godhead vs. the Trinity.

Whenever you're learning something new, you have to know where you are and where the new thing is in relation to it.  That's just a human weakness that we have to deal with.  If the Godhead is where he began, then people have to be able to explain where to go from there in order to understand the new concept of the Trinity.

9 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

Historically, the argument was between the Trinity and the subordinationists (today, Jehovah's Witness best exemplify this view). Modalism came somewhat later. I'm not sure that the LDS Godhead was proposed during those early discussions/debates.

You know, I've had difficulty finding out what JWs actually believe about the Holy Trio (for lack of a better generic term).  They've described it and end up saying things that seem self contradictory.  This is different than the Trinity which doesn't actually contradict, but is simply incomprehensible (to me).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this