The trinity = the family


e v e
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, e v e said:

monotheism is not the issue in reality. in reality two realms are at war and have been for a long time. One realm is God’s. The other is not.

Ive no problem that He is one God and that His male and female attributes (Christ and Miss, who are real and gorgeous beings) personify as She our comforter and He the son, Yet, are Him. Having the same nature. Yet are completely unique persons who are His Son and His feminine counterpart. 

I also have no problem admitting deities exist of both realms a) those God said not to follow and who battle to crush Gods souls and then b) God’s own 144k who are /will be elohim, just as Adam is elohim per Genesis 1.

That is what the new body is about - restoring the stolen birthright belonging to His sons. Not creatures. Sons. Man only became a lower creature, descending to the mortal, after the fall. 

 

At this point I simply want to thank you. You've shared what comes across as a viewpoint that you grew into through spiritual experiences and revelations. Your understanding of God is uncommon in Christianity. Is there a religious fellowship that you are part of--one that shares your understandings, or at least affirms your experiences and relationship with God?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

So when you asked your question:

Which definition of literal are you inquiring about?

I only used the term "literal" because the church uses that term. I wasn't inquiring about the term. I was inquiring about the obvious conundrum that you seem to be tap dancing around. Are they eternal beings without beginning of days or end of years or not? Is one the father of our spirits or not? How can they both be true? The question you seem to be missing is how can they both be true. Try working on that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, brotherofJared said:

Are they eternal beings (spirits) without beginning of days or end of years or not?

Not.

9 minutes ago, brotherofJared said:

Is one the father of our spirits or not?

Yes.
Where is the "obvious conundrum"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, estradling75 said:

Calling it a family opens a different set of issues for the LDS... Namely..  You have Father and Son... so why not Mother and Daughter as well?  If you followed any discussion on Heavenly Mother our reluctance to engage beyond what is clearly given in scriptures and modern revelation should be clear

Well, we know who the mother of Christ is. There's no problem there.

How do you know that e v e's post wasn't addressing that set of issues? In fact, it appears that's exactly what she was addressing. What is the LDS view? But what we got here is a false statement that we believe the Trinity is not a family when I believe that we believe that they are.

I admit, there are some terminology issues. I struggle with definitions of other people also. I've struggled with them in this thread as well, but it seems that it would be reasonable to learn what the other person's understanding of their terms are, even if they are not similar to ours, to level the playing field.

As for Heavenly Mother, we know she exists. We don't know what her role is. Some modern Christians have postulated that her role is as the Holy Ghost. I don't agree with that. You're right, we have no scripture or doctrine to clarify it, but isn't it amazing that modern Christians are coming around to realize that not only does she exist, that she was an important part of early Israelitish worship. Here, we have another self-proclaimed Christian who also believes that there is a heavenly mother. That's progress in my book. I'm not sure why you all are playing soccer with her head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NeedleinA said:

Not.

Yes.
Where is the "obvious conundrum"?

Don't change what I said and then argue about that. They are eternal beings. If you want to disagree with that, then feel free, but don't change my word to spirits because that isn't what I said.

If you can't see the conundrum, then there is really no discussion, is there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

At this point I simply want to thank you. You've shared what comes across as a viewpoint that you grew into through spiritual experiences and revelations. Your understanding of God is uncommon in Christianity. Is there a religious fellowship that you are part of--one that shares your understandings, or at least affirms your experiences and relationship with God?

i don’t belong to any. I was raised catholic, left that as a youth, and for a long time i was agnostic. while agnostic one morning i was in huge pain. i got on a couch having been up all night hoping that by sitting i would sleep. i closed my eyes and i was in the other world. at that time i was a grad student. i don’t use drugs or drink much at all except socially. so it was real. i met a being. no it was not God but at the time i thought it was. the being masqueraded as God, being you know who and being quite gorgeous still. Thinking he was God i cried remembering all my sins. he didn’t comfort me. i was one inch from his face. He resembled depictions of Christ, but as a sort of twin. he knew all my sins and said ‘there is no time.’ i opened my eyes and my pain was gone and mostly is gone still. 

fastforward. many things happened. years passed. i was again transported ... but this time i was with God. He is utter melting Love. i realized the first experience was with someone else, though i had to swallow my pride for having been confused. God took me to genesis and showed me the events. He did not explain them, i was there and saw. Did i understand? not all. Because you see i had read the bible 3x as a child but not once in a long time since then. I guess at this point being in love with Him i was no longer agnostic:)

He took me to the tower of babel as it fell and other events. Did i become a better person? sort of. i’m still learning!  i understood He is God and every fiber of me understood that. I met she, also. i cuddled with her in His hands and she read me scripture. It was a living event in my life. I was with Christ. 

Sometimes now i understand things I did not then understand as He showed them. I’ll stop there. 

Im alone. My experiences are such that most mainline christians reject it because of certain seeming contradictions to canons and because of these experiences where He has spoon fed me all i know.  but recall rev says the old will dream dreams....

you asked about groups. my only group so far is just meeting sweet souls of Him... such as sonofJared here, a very honorable son of His. And other souls of His I have met over the years. i have one evangelical friend who i told about Mother and he replied yes... you are right. i was so happy for him that he would understand , and accept our comforter. Irenaeus did you know, understood this. per his own writings.

so in this world i have two souls i am close to who understand. One is a most lovely girl in new zealand . she is very ill with cancer. The other is a man in Holland i’ve known for a long time , a most humble genuine soul, who’s a scholar of ancient texts including scripture... so we talk a lot about these things. He was raised in that doors project taking bibles behind the iron curtain since a baby, His father was a pastor and his brother is an evangelical pastor. Who understands all this. But hasn’t accepted much of it. 

 

Edited by e v e
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Vort said:

Not sure that anyone's shy about embracing a familial but unfamiliar description of God. Seems to me more like people are hesitant to embrace a redefinition of "trinity". I mean, I don't believe in the Islamic Shahada, but I'm still going to object to someone saying, "The Shahada is actually a man and a woman with their children." No, it's not, and it's not a matter of what I believe about families or about Islam. It's a matter of what the term "shahada" means. Same thing here, I think.

I didn't see e v e increase or decrease the number of the trinity. The fact is, in the LDS religion, they are related along familial lines. Period. I seriously don't think she was redefining the word Trinity anymore than we redefine it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

At this point I simply want to thank you. You've shared what comes across as a viewpoint that you grew into through spiritual experiences and revelations. Your understanding of God is uncommon in Christianity. Is there a religious fellowship that you are part of--one that shares your understandings, or at least affirms your experiences and relationship with God?

Well as to a part of a community, God and she. Who else? ❤️ Oh and souls who i may meet as i go through life. 

I have chronic fatigue and i spend all my time alone, usually resting,  except for when i go to work. 

Edited by e v e
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, anatess2 said:

The Godhead relationship is not of family - as in parents, children, siblings

I disagree. It very much is a family with parents, and children and siblings.

 

6 hours ago, anatess2 said:

but as a Presidency, e.g. Bishop and his 2 counselors.

Sorry, I only see a pattern of three and unity in the work. But clearly, Christ is the Son of God. That is family. I suppose a Bishop could call his son as a counselor in the bishopric and then it would be family also, especially if both counselors were his sons, like in the Godhead. But I don't see it as anymore than a pattern which we don't follow in detail. If we did, then it'd be family as well.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, e v e said:

monotheism is not the issue in reality. in reality two realms are at war and have been for a long time. One realm is God’s. The other is not.

Ive no problem that He is one God and that His male and female attributes (Christ and Miss, who are real and gorgeous beings) personify as She our comforter and He the son, Yet, are Him. Having the same nature. Yet are completely unique persons who are His Son and His feminine counterpart. 

I also have no problem admitting deities exist of both realms a) those God said not to follow and who battle to crush Gods souls and then b) God’s own 144k who are /will be elohim, just as Adam is elohim per Genesis 1.

That is what the new body is about - restoring the stolen birthright belonging to His sons. Not creatures. Sons. Man only became a lower creature, descending to the mortal, after the fall. 

 

See, I can except some of this if I translate into what I understand of the trinity. It may be my male ego, but I believe the Holy Ghost to be a man though we are not told either way. We make assumptions but frankly, the influence that the Holy Ghost has over us, it would make sense that it may be a woman, though not our Heavenly Mother as some have suggested. It will be a real shocker if in the next conference women are accepted into the priesthood. It certainly seems to be the way things are leaning with some of the changes that have come about. 

I would certainly agree that there is a war between the two realms, God's and the other. That war is not entirely fought by unseen forces.

He is one God with both male and female attributes. He and his wife together making one whole being. This is essential LDS doctrine.

To me, I believe that some of the ideas may seem strange because of terminology, it is not really that much different than the religious practices of ancient Mesoamerican peoples, what we have of it. It is clear to me that the feathered serpent represented Christ. They called him Quetzalcoatl. It's a different term, but I believe they are talking about the same person. History has a way of skewing the information in such a way that as we read it, we come to different conclusions even though it may actually be talking about the same thing. What e v e is talking about is a shadow of truth, even though she is not using the same words we do.

Our commission isn't to correct error. Frankly, I don't think we'd know error if it slapped us in the face and I think we're about to discover even more of our errors that have been slapping us about for some time. We've certainly seen enough error as we've grown, race and the priesthood, single men and exaltation, wearing of veils, ministers of other religions being hirelings of Satan just to name a few. I honestly don't know why we get stuck on an idea and insist that it's true when it's been shown and proven that we don't have it all. Our commission is to accept what good others have and invite them to see if we can't add something to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, prisonchaplain said:

At this point I simply want to thank you. You've shared what comes across as a viewpoint that you grew into through spiritual experiences and revelations. Your understanding of God is uncommon in Christianity. Is there a religious fellowship that you are part of--one that shares your understandings, or at least affirms your experiences and relationship with God?

no modern denomination affirms my experiences relationship with God.

To affirm my experiences would be to affirm God still speaks to souls and prophecy is possible - something i do not claim or attempt though others interpret my experiences as such. 

To affirm my relationship with Him would be to accept her... but many do not want to...it takes humbleness and to give up pride , to say she is central to the trinity but by refusing to even look at the option, in taking that position many hurt God. Plus there is the mimic fake satanic gaia concept which Is Not His and is pagan. So then the gnostic label is used, the same as it was used on early christians who knew the truth. 

I lost one pentecostal friend plus her brother over this. One catholic friend who taught in my department faded away but recently she came back, said she studied to try to find out. and its true... and she was glowing. I hope she is the girl of one of the 144k. 

Edited by e v e
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, e v e said:

Actually I was utterly surprised that the mainstream christian view is the LDS one, at least enough to defend it so vociferously here. I did not know. 

It's not the same view. The trinity is a word that describes three members of the Godhead. We can all agree on that. Your definition is exactly in line with that definition. You're view, as I understand it also has three members in the Godhead, you just believe that one of them is female. You are not alone in that understanding. I have to say, I agree with you, there are a lot of nitpickers around here. In addition, I'm utterly shocked that no one here, that I've seen so far, can see the familial relationship in the Godhead. I have to wonder who the people on this board think we are. Maybe they think that God really isn't our Father in Heaven or maybe they don't see that as a Family relationship.

I'm stumped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, brotherofJared said:

Nope. You keep barking up the wrong tree. There is a conundrum here and you want to talk about beings. 🙄

A conundrum that you have created yourself.
What definition of "literal" are you referring to, since you offered two alternatives?... (crickets)
What do you mean by "beings" since you are emphatic it isn't synonymous with "spirits"?... (crickets, again)

At this point, you have boxed yourself in with your answers. When applied against actual LDS definitions and teachings, the smoke and mirrors of the 'conundrum' would have quickly evaporated.
I'll find a different tree with actual roots(substance) to focus my attention on.
Best wishes in your studies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, brotherofJared said:

See, I can except some of this if I translate into what I understand of the trinity. It may be my male ego, but I believe the Holy Ghost to be a man though we are not told either way. We make assumptions but frankly, the influence that the Holy Ghost has over us, it would make sense that it may be a woman, though not our Heavenly Mother as some have suggested. It will be a real shocker if in the next conference women are accepted into the priesthood. It certainly seems to be the way things are leaning with some of the changes that have come about. 

I would certainly agree that there is a war between the two realms, God's and the other. That war is not entirely fought by unseen forces.

He is one God with both male and female attributes. He and his wife together making one whole being. This is essential LDS doctrine.

To me, I believe that some of the ideas may seem strange because of terminology, it is not really that much different than the religious practices of ancient Mesoamerican peoples, what we have of it. It is clear to me that the feathered serpent represented Christ. They called him Quetzalcoatl. It's a different term, but I believe they are talking about the same person. History has a way of skewing the information in such a way that as we read it, we come to different conclusions even though it may actually be talking about the same thing. What e v e is talking about is a shadow of truth, even though she is not using the same words we do.

Our commission isn't to correct error. Frankly, I don't think we'd know error if it slapped us in the face and I think we're about to discover even more of our errors that have been slapping us about for some time. We've certainly seen enough error as we've grown, race and the priesthood, single men and exaltation, wearing of veils, ministers of other religions being hirelings of Satan just to name a few. I honestly don't know why we get stuck on an idea and insist that it's true when it's been shown and proven that we don't have it all. Our commission is to accept what good others have and invite them to see if we can't add something to it.

:  ) 

 

what He showed me is that He speaks reality from love... she. She is the mother of all... i have no problem that women not be pastors. i believe male protects and covers female and directs her and female is all the love, nurturing and helping the male... there is no higher and lower , only that they are different ... and that female is a man’s core and His glory and sweetness. so i don’t think miss would be creating the realities; thats christ.  He does that... but He creates from all the love , from His core, which is all the love he feels from her , those two together... God is love. They worship each other and love most deeply their sons and daughters.  She loves Him so much. 

Edited by e v e
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having reached the end of all these posts, I thought I might address how the trinity is a family and their relationship to all of us.

I believe that spirits are not born, they are organized. I believe that this organization took place according to the word of God, the Father and that is how He is our Father, literally. He organized us into families, starting with Father Adam down through all time, placing his Son, Christ in the meridian of time. 

In such an organization, that allows us to be both children of God and children of our mortal Fathers. Thus the Trinity is family as are we all.

I'm not sure how our Heavenly Mother is involved in all of that, but I don't believe there was any procreative activity going on to make spirits, not even Christ. I believe, like as it is here, that Christ brought us out of chaos into light and brought us to the Father where we were begotten sons and daughters of the Father by his word.

It's all about family and it will be forever more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

A conundrum that you have created yourself.
What definition of "literal" are you referring to, since you offered two alternatives?... (crickets)
What do you mean by "beings" since you are emphatic it isn't synonymous with "spirits"?... (crickets, again)

😂🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, brotherofJared said:

Having reached the end of all these posts, I thought I might address how the trinity is a family and their relationship to all of us.

I believe that spirits are not born, they are organized. I believe that this organization took place according to the word of God, the Father and that is how He is our Father, literally. He organized us into families, starting with Father Adam down through all time, placing his Son, Christ in the meridian of time. 

In such an organization, that allows us to be both children of God and children of our mortal Fathers. Thus the Trinity is family as are we all.

I'm not sure how our Heavenly Mother is involved in all of that, but I don't believe there was any procreative activity going on to make spirits, not even Christ. I believe, like as it is here, that Christ brought us out of chaos into light and brought us to the Father where we were begotten sons and daughters of the Father by his word.

It's all about family and it will be forever more.

that’s lovely..

 

to be clear I agree there is no need of procreation in heaven or by God... who creates by the Word. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, brotherofJared said:

Oh. I didn't say pastors. In our church, ALL the (worthy) men hold the priesthood. We're not all pastors.

was just out of habit i said that. i don’t know what lds call those who are bishops or such. well - bishops but i don’t know much about that. 

Edited by e v e
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, brotherofJared said:

He is one God with both male and female attributes. He and his wife together making one whole being. This is essential LDS doctrine.

 

yes. depending on point of view She was seen in Genesis at creation, as ruach; by moses as a pillar or cloud ; by us felt as our comforter; by God , she being His feminine attribute, having a gorgeous imperishable body and being His core of love and His spirit.....just as each of His 144k is an attribute of Him, alive gorgeous sons and daughters at the time of the Change to who He will give imperishable bodies. 

Edited by e v e
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, brotherofJared said:

I disagree. It very much is a family with parents, and children and siblings.

 

Sorry, I only see a pattern of three and unity in the work. But clearly, Christ is the Son of God. That is family. I suppose a Bishop could call his son as a counselor in the bishopric and then it would be family also, especially if both counselors were his sons, like in the Godhead. But I don't see it as anymore than a pattern which we don't follow in detail. If we did, then it'd be family as well.

 

The Godhead does not cease to be the Godhead if the Father would have chosen somebody other than his begotten Son.  The Godhead does not cease to be the Godhead just because the Holy Ghost is not the Father's begotten Son.  The Godhead does not cease to be the Godhead just because the Holy Mother is not mentioned in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of us, His souls the sons and daughters, follow the same Image of God, where in Genesis God said of us that we were "made in Our Image" male and female, the 'our' referring to He and mother.

The term 'image' means elohim in Hebrew.  

It also refers to a type (archetype), in the same way that breath and water and fire are each types related to God's Spirit. Just as Egypt is a type representing the other realm which opposes God. So on that basis, SonOfJared's use of the concept of family, what he described as organizing, makes sense to me as type (of a trinity concept). I don't claim to understand all what SoJ wrote about that aspect of his lds beliefs, but I think I get it well enough for now. Also, that doesn't mean that God is replaceable or is merely a type. For me, He is God, She is God, the Son is God. Really and Actually and Literally and not hypothetically. 

Edited by e v e
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share