Trinity Vs. Godhead

[NateHowe]

I'm not willing to get into the fray here, but let me address this:

BTW--I dare say that you do interpret Scripture, because in my two years here, I have found a diversity of opinion on many doctrinal issues amongst the LDS posters. Beyond the official church doctrines, your approaches and views vary nearly as much as we Protestants do.

It is true that members of the Church have varying opinions on certain doctrines, but Protestantism and other religions have no single, official source of doctrine. You may say that the Bible fills this function, but I am speaking in terms of revelatory leadership.

All differences of doctrinal opinion in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints stem from two sources:

1. People misunderstand, misinterpret, manipulate, ignore, or otherwise misuse the words of prophets, past and present.

2. On certain issues, the Lord has not seen fit to give specific revelation. In this case, it really is not ours to speculate where He has not chosen to speak explicitly.

Neither is an indication of an untrue Church or an incomplete doctrine. The Lord has revealed anew all things that a man or woman must do to be saved. He has restored the authority to perform saving ordinances. He has laid out the plan of salvation. He has provided living Prophets to direct the Church. This is enough. Differences of opinion are signs of weakness and imperfection in individuals, not cracks in the foundation of the Church.

[Abraham]

I truly appreciate your type of rebuttal, as eacn of us as Covey states, do not see things as they really are but see them as we are. However, one case in point, is that the various so-called Christian sects as you say are pretty much to same. Well, they are not the same, and most if fundamentally wrong in any of their liturgy makes them at odds with the truth, and thus each other, and thus God. Though I can completely accept the fact that each may belive they have 'the' truth, it is impossible that all of them have all of the truth, since God is not the author of such confusion, his truth doth not vary from the right nor to the left. It is kind of like being sort of pregnant, either you are or you are not. So in short, there are only three options. Either one is right, the other is right, or they (we) are all wrong. All of us cannot be right, and be opposed as to litugy, dogma, doctrine, etc. When John said, this is life eternal to know God, just becasue one believes God is a toad, and another a block of wood, another Mother Nature, and another a spirit, and on and on ad infinitum, it is like Hugh Nibley said that what we believe, what degree we have, or our Seminary status has any bearing whatsoever on whether a thing is true or not. What we believe and what we have faith in has nothing to do with what is true. It just is. So if you and I differ we can enjoy a fun repartee, but both of us cannot be completely right. One of us may lead to Christ or the other might (or neither) but it is clear that we cannot get there unless one or the other finally accepts the error of his doctrine and accepts Christ as he really is. I know that there are supposedly 250 scriptures in the Bible that allude to the Trinity - however if you read each one, it is a looooong stretch to try and see that link because even Harper's Bible Dictionary says, "the concept of the Trinity did not exist until the 3rd Century AD." I used to have acces to the Interpreters Bible series but don't any more and wonder what they might have to say about it. Well, regardless of my belief, I have no effect on the true concept of God and his Son and the Holy Spirit. Regardless, we will all come to Christ. Due to the Atonement, the first and second death have been overcome. We will live forever, and will be with God, and either accept or reject him in the final analysis. Thus the second death will have been overcome by the Atonement, but for the rejectors it will be temporary, and spiritual death will then be permanent. Perhaps the real test is to see if we will love and respect those who do not agree, comply, or acquiescewith us. Again, it seems so clear because we have molded our custom-made dark-colored glasses and someday they will be clear. Then we can rejoice in the fullness of truth. Thank you for the time for your wonderful insights.

Abraham

[WANDERER]

Other faiths have criticised Christianity as being polytheistic and don't differentiate between trinitarians or those that believe in a godhead. I did find an interesting trinitarian diagram of "God the Father is not the Son is not the Holyspirit and yet all of them are God" in triangular form and realised that both belief systems would interpret it differently and yet agree.

[Aelswyth]

i don't understand everything about the trinity. neither do i understand everything concerning an eternal regression and eternal progression of Gods. when i read the scriptures, i take what God says at face value. i don't think he would say one thing and mean another. God says there is only one God and he knows not any other. that supports the idea of the trinity. father, son, holy spirit are one God. godhead is the belief in many Gods. Trinity = 1 God. Godhead = 3 Gods. in the bible and book of mormon, do you ever read God teaching that there is more than one God?

The term "God" in the scriptures, just like the term "Lord" and the name "Jehovah", is used interchangeably to refer to the individual members of the Godhead but also to the Godhead as a whole. So one has to look at the context of each usage to understand who exactly is being referred to in any given instance. Clearly, since we know that there exist the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, as beings who are aware of each other and speak to and of each other, then any passage speaking of the oneness of God must be referring to the Godhead as a whole, not to one member of the Godhead.

I look at it kind of like how the media refer to the actions of a President or Government as the actions of the country they represent, i.e. "Today France ratified the treaty." Obviously this does not mean that either the landmass of France ratified a treaty or that every individual in France ratified a treaty; it means the President of France ratified the treaty.

One can actually see a similar usage of "God" in many ancient religions, where it can mean either a specific God or a collective Godhead. It is used this way in Hinduism, for example; it was also used this way by the Celtic Druids. Nothing new, really.