Trinity Vs. Godhead

[Guest Breezy]

I hope I have this in the right place. I have a lot of trouble understanding the concepts of a Trinity vs. a Godhead. Would someone be willing to break this down for me ? I was reading about this on another LDS forum and asked for a clarification but the answers I got didnt make sense to me. I never really understood the whole concept of the Trinity but I dont get the LDS take on a Godhead either. I either dont have enough background to get it or I am missing information, I am not sure which it is.

thank you

breezy

PS Maybe this should go in the missionary section? I dont know.

[ztodd]

Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are 3 distinct, separate personages. Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ both have perfect, glorified physical bodies that looks like ours. We are literally created in their image. The Holy Ghost has a spiritual body but not a physical body.

See:

http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgne...contentLocale=0 under "What Kind of Being Is God?"

http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/130/22#22

[Guest Breezy]

Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are 3 distinct, separate personages. Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ both have perfect, glorified physical bodies that looks like ours. We are literally created in their image. The Holy Ghost has a spiritual body but not a physical body.

See:

http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgne...contentLocale=0 under "What Kind of Being Is God?"

http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/130/22#22

Thank You for the links. This site is pretty cool. I posted my question and popping up at the bottom it lists the thread where Godhead was discussed. Dang if that isnt a truly handy feature Just spent half an hour reading it.

[DrewM]

Breezy,

Welcome to the boards.

The Trinity as defined in most mainstream Christian creeds, is that there is only one eternal God. This God is somehow mysteriously also three persons, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. He is all three at the same time. It would be as though you were Breezy, April, and Sunny all at the same time. God, therefore, is not the Father alone, not the Son alone, nor the Holy Ghost alone, but he is the Father, Son and Holy Ghost all at the same time. Don't worry if it doesn't make sense. It's not supposed to.

The Godhead as taught by LDS is that God the Father is supreme. The Son, Jesus Christ, is a totally separate individual and being from the Father. So is the Holy Ghost. It is not one God or one Being who is manifested in three persons, but is in fact three beings or even three Gods who are one in purpose, power, etc. These three beings are one God in the sense of being one in power, purpose, might, etc, but they are in fact three beings just as much as you and I are separate beings.

Hope this helps.

[Traveler]

Another very important notion is the Fatherhood of G-d the Father and the family of heaven. According to the LDS notion of the divine family we are all the children of G-d; even as Jesus commanded that in our prayers we address "Our Father who art in Heaven". LDS believe that all belong to the family of G-d and that we are brothers and sisters – including those that despise our faith. You may have seen efforts recently in the news (presidential campaign) to ridicule this notion by making fun of our beliefs suggesting that Jesus and Satan are brothers.

The concept of family is central to LDS faith. We believe the greatest blessings and joys of life can only be fully understood, developed and enjoyed through the love, sacrifice and appreciation of families.

The Traveler

[Guest Breezy]

The Trinity as defined in most mainstream Christian creeds, is that there is only one eternal God. This God is somehow mysteriously also three persons, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. He is all three at the same time. It would be as though you were Breezy, April, and Sunny all at the same time. God, therefore, is not the Father alone, not the Son alone, nor the Holy Ghost alone, but he is the Father, Son and Holy Ghost all at the same time. Don't worry if it doesn't make sense. It's not supposed to.

The Godhead as taught by LDS is that God the Father is supreme. The Son, Jesus Christ, is a totally separate individual and being from the Father. So is the Holy Ghost. It is not one God or one Being who is manifested in three persons, but is in fact three beings or even three Gods who are one in purpose, power, etc. These three beings are one God in the sense of being one in power, purpose, might, etc, but they are in fact three beings just as much as you and I are separate beings.

Hope this helps.

Actually that does help alot. That has to be the most concise, understandable, and clearest explanation I have ever gotten. It also makes the most sense to me. I never have been able to get the whole Trinity thing it just didnt ever make sense.. Thank you that was awesome.

[Maya]

The Trinity as defined in most mainstream Christian creeds, is that there is only one eternal God. This God is somehow mysteriously also three persons, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. He is all three at the same time. It would be as though you were Breezy, April, and Sunny all at the same time. God, therefore, is not the Father alone, not the Son alone, nor the Holy Ghost alone, but he is the Father, Son and Holy Ghost all at the same time. Don't worry if it doesn't make sense. It's not supposed to.

The Godhead as taught by LDS is that God the Father is supreme. The Son, Jesus Christ, is a totally separate individual and being from the Father. So is the Holy Ghost. It is not one God or one Being who is manifested in three persons, but is in fact three beings or even three Gods who are one in purpose, power, etc. These three beings are one God in the sense of being one in power, purpose, might, etc, but they are in fact three beings just as much as you and I are separate beings.

Hope this helps.

Actually that does help alot. That has to be the most concise, understandable, and clearest explanation I have ever gotten. It also makes the most sense to me. I never have been able to get the whole Trinity thing it just didnt ever make sense.. Thank you that was awesome.

It never made any sense to me either and as I was a sundayschooltacher for small kids...I skipped the lessons where I was supposed to tell that God was bodyless and everywhere and.... I really felt relief as I found out what LDS believe... I think I always believed that, even before joining!

Happy hunting... and Christmas too! ... there is so much to learn... so much of interest in LDS!

[Drimcynn]

Breezy,

Welcome to the boards.

The Trinity as defined in most mainstream Christian creeds, is that there is only one eternal God. This God is somehow mysteriously also three persons, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. He is all three at the same time. It would be as though you were Breezy, April, and Sunny all at the same time. God, therefore, is not the Father alone, not the Son alone, nor the Holy Ghost alone, but he is the Father, Son and Holy Ghost all at the same time. Don't worry if it doesn't make sense. It's not supposed to.

The Godhead as taught by LDS is that God the Father is supreme. The Son, Jesus Christ, is a totally separate individual and being from the Father. So is the Holy Ghost. It is not one God or one Being who is manifested in three persons, but is in fact three beings or even three Gods who are one in purpose, power, etc. These three beings are one God in the sense of being one in power, purpose, might, etc, but they are in fact three beings just as much as you and I are separate beings.

Hope this helps.

Well stated DrewM! Very clear and understandable.

One thing I found interesting on my mission is when a evangelical christian was trying to tell me why they couldn't believe in the Godhead, was that a Pastor told them the Trinity was like an egg. yolk, albumen(egg white), & the shell. I was confused as a catholic before I converted to LDS and the analogy of the Egg didn't help me understand this family's feelings either while serving my mission.

It is truly a comfort that the gospel makes it so easy to understand the Godhead.

[Dale]

The creedal writers to fit the three persons of God with mono-theism had to adopt the latin word persona. Basically the persons of God were compared to the person's an actor portrays via face masks. So the person's of God were supposed to be like the person's of an actor, but not person's like three human's. Thus the creedal writer's felt they brought the Trinity out from any thought it was a teaching of three God's.

But with the person's it never fit the word persona because the person's are not mere role's of God. They are aware of each other which sound's to me like it exactly fits the definition associated with three human person's. Even if it were conceded they existed as part of the same being it sound's close to thritheism. Tritheism is the idea the Trinity is made up of three God's.

LDS would reject the latin word persona, and acknowledge the three as seperate person's.

Another LDS belief is that the Father, and Son are physical personages not formless as to the spirit essence they supposedly share. So each of the person's would have a spirit form, and physical body that belong's to them.

[bcspace]

I have a lot of trouble understanding the concepts of a Trinity vs. a Godhead. Would someone be willing to break this down for me ?

Trinity: The Three are separate individual Persons who are literally one Being/God.

Modalism: The Three are just manifestations (modes) of God.

They sound similar and use the same language, but they are not the same. However, modalism is rare.

LDS Godhead: The Three are separate individual Persons and separate individual Beings. They are each Gods, the Son and Holy Ghost being subordinate to the Father.

[JonboySquarepants]

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?

[Dale]

Are the Father, Son and Holy Spirit aware of each other like three human's are? Does not such a belief wander close to the idea of Gods? Prove that you can take God at face value if the New Testament mixes mono-theism with the tri-theistic idea the person's are person's.

The latin word persono they employed to deny they were person's make's no sense. It say's the person's of God are like three unintelligent person's an actor play's in a play via face masks. But the person's of an actor can't talk with each other as the Father and Son can. The person's of an actor have no intelligence a part from the actor's intelligence. The person's of an actor have the intelligence of an idol.

[Maureen]

Breezy,

The Trinity as defined in most mainstream Christian creeds, is that there is only one eternal God. This God is somehow mysteriously also three persons, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. He is all three at the same time. It would be as though you were Breezy, April, and Sunny all at the same time. God, therefore, is not the Father alone, not the Son alone, nor the Holy Ghost alone, but he is the Father, Son and Holy Ghost all at the same time. Don't worry if it doesn't make sense. It's not supposed to.

Not sure what you mean by the statement "at the same time" but here's another way to define the Trinity:

God exists in three persons as one God. There exists God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. They are distinct from one another - the Father in only the Father, the Son is only the Son and the Holy Spirit is only the Holy Spirit. The persons of the Trinity cannot be confounded. But because there is only one God (Shema - Deuteronomy 6:4-9) and he is divine, all three persons have the same, one true divinity. They are individually God and collectively God.

M.

[MorningStar]

I've found that Evangelical Christians I've met don't describe the trinity the same way Catholics do. It's really confusing. Evangelicals have given me the egg comparison - the shell, the yolk, and the white making up one egg. That just makes no sense to me.

[JonboySquarepants]

i think it's hard to put an incomprehensible God into words and terms that our limited human brains can understand and fully comprehend.

[Moksha]

Here is a simple analogy:

Trinity - Think of Pokémon: They can at different times be in one of three different states of being.

Godhead - Think of the Three Stooges: While one comedy troop, they still remain Larry, Moe and Curly.

[AnthonyB]

Moshka,

I think your describing "Modalism" by saying "different times be in one of three different states(or modes) of being." That is that God appears at different times in a different modes. The pentecostal oneness churches are the largest grouping that holds that view.

Trinitarians (as I understand it) would have it that all three are eternally and simultaneously seperate persons, capable of intercommunicating, and feeling emotions between each other.

You can have beings that are not personal. (eg an ant)

You can have a being that is a person (eg man)

Even though we have no example on earth, trad Christians place God in third category.

A being with multiple persons.

I think marriage offers a limited view of how this might work. If you've ever meet a couple that has been married for many years and enjoyed a good marriage then there is a union between them. They instinctively know the other and their wills, mindset etc. It is almost as "if" they have become one being, whilst remaining two persons. At this point I think I have described the LDS take on how Godhead works.

Traditional Christians take this further and would have the unifying of the persons of God has gone a stage further. That in their perfect, glorified, eternal relationship the closeness is such that they are unified into "one being". As if the closeness and unity of relationship that the LDS see has been taken to an infinte level and at that point the persons have become one being. They are so unified as persons that they only way to describe them is as one living thing(being) made of three persons.The three persons have the same glorified, unsurpassable essence, that is the description of who they are and their natures are identical so that all the superlatives(praises) applied to one could be supplied to all. However their functions remain distinct as Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Hmm I sorry if that doesn't make sense to you, I suppose a man describing God is akin to ant trying to describe astro-physics.

[prisonchaplain]

I've found that Evangelical Christians I've met don't describe the trinity the same way Catholics do. It's really confusing. Evangelicals have given me the egg comparison - the shell, the yolk, and the white making up one egg. That just makes no sense to me.

First, concerning the Trinity, evangelicals and Catholics are on the same page. Perhaps the explanations differ, but the teaching is the same.

Any attempt to explain the nature of God is going to be limited. The egg example is just that--an example. Three separate parts make up the one whole--the shell, the white, and the yolk. Each is something in itself, yet as a whole they make the egg. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct as well, and yet together, they are God.

There is a bottom-line issue that was mentioned: Do we believe in one God or not? Most Christians proclaim loudly that we are monotheist. We are not pagans, worshipping three gods. Of course, LDS are not either, in that they only worship the Father. However, they have been willing to push the boundary of God's nature much further than other groups--to the point of speaking of the Godhead as three gods.

[AnthonyB]

I'd agree with PC that it is very hard to describe.

Another very historic example was a ray of sun "light"? A light has a source (The Father), an expression or ray (the Son) and an effect on people (ie the warmth of the ray you feel) (the Holy Spirit.) All of these exist in their own right, but each is part of a whole thing a ray of sunlight.

Of course as PC said any example that is used falls short of describing God, and always has limitations.

[Abraham]

I know we could, llike so many philosophers and thrologians throughout history, go round and round on this one. The major flaws in the trinity are that Christ was resurrected and still has his body, as evidenced by numerous witnesses of a physical, eating, and speaking Christ. Unless there is a familial relationship with the Father there could be no reconciliation wtih this. Could the Father have a son who has abilities that he does not have? No, not truly. A physical body can feel, sense, and even procreate (let's not go there) and a god w/o a body cannot. As John explains so clearly Christ did nothing that he did not already see his Father do. The example of rays of light from the sun (son) being the Son of God cannot work since light cannot be seen. I know you will want to resist this principle but put yourself between a light source and any object. Can you see the light between you and it, no. Light illuminates, highlights, but cannot be seen. Christ was seen as a physical God, not just a representation of the Father;s essence. It has been argued forcefully but not successfully that Christ was simply the physical manisfestation of the Father so the natural man could relate to God, and all would have been well if he had not performed the promise of eternal immortatliy by being the first fruits of them that slept (read resurrection). Where does that leave the essence of the Father, in the Tinitarian sense? God has made this so simple. It is a Father and Son relationship, that pure and simple. The family is going to be the eternal unit. That is why we are his sons and daughters not in some metapysical sense but in a literal thoughbeit spiritual sense. That is the pattern repreated over and over in the scriptures. It is easy to understand, comprehend, in the sense we see the order of things, and things as they really (Jacob 4:13), not to say any of us can comprehend Him fully yet. Since the Trinity concept is not taught anywhere in the Bible and was not adobpted until the 4th Century AD, should tells us that something has gone astray. If the Father fills the Universe how can we come to 'know' a loving God - according to the Trinitarian view God is unknowable. How can he be a loving Father, if he is equally 'Mother Nature' as not. Who do the angels worship if not God???? I assure you they do not play their harps, floating around seeking a bodiless, boundless, unseable, unknowable, God. How could he have a throne if he does not sit on it. How coule Stephen witness that he literally saw Jesus standing on the right hand of God, if he has no hand to begin with. Though it may be figurative about God's right hand man, it is not what he saw, or said. In my humble opinion the Trinitarian view of God is a convenient dogma that allows any and all doctrine to be embraced since the foundation is built on sand. Nothing can more confusing, nor heretical. You can't tell me that 32,400 Christian sects or churches (less one) can have their own take on the Ahanasian creed, with diametrially opposed doctrine and still be considered God's church. If the Trinity were true could God be the author of so much confusion. A house cannot stand against itself and that is exactly what Nicea gave us, a feud that will not be settled until Christ comes again and straightens out their mess.

Regards,

Abraham

[Guest Malcolm]

This is so much fun, especially for me simple minded folk. Since I had no previous high level or theologically educated concept of the Trinity, I read the scriptures in a very simplistic and direct way.

At the Jordan, during Jesus baptism all eyewitness described the scene in more or less exactly the same way. Jesus in the water, the voice in heaven declaring to be the Father of the baptized and the Holy Spirit descending in a more or less physical (visible) fashion from heaven. So I don't have to fret much there with highly evolved analysis.

The problem arises when people try to put language (articulate) about a physical experience that has been defined previously by compromise. Since I was totally ignorant of such previous arrangements, and I am reading today for the very first time I can decide, on my own what the scripture says. This seems to be impossible for some since they already crafted a certain paradigm around that concept (the Trinity). Shifting to a new paradigm represents a quantum leap in as much as 1. it threatens ALL previous assumptions about one's "knowledge and understanding" and 2. it will force a re-casting of the framework and angle of analysis for the whole subject. I will not even mention the social and emotional impact that such shift will surely bring about.

History is littered with theories that previously stood for hundreds of years until their demise. At the end, only time vindicates the prophets. Most of them were put to the sword for blaspheming, remember?

[Maureen]

...The major flaws in the trinity are that Christ was resurrected and still has his body, as evidenced by numerous witnesses of a physical, eating, and speaking Christ...

The second person of the Trinity (Jesus) became incarnate for our (humans) benefit. His humanity does not distract or change his divinity. Jesus was God before he became human and is still God now as a resurrected being; also for our benefit.

M.

[prisonchaplain]

I know we could, llike so many philosophers and thrologians throughout history, go round and round on this one. The major flaws in the trinity are that Christ was resurrected and still has his body, as evidenced by numerous witnesses of a physical, eating, and speaking Christ. Unless there is a familial relationship with the Father there could be no reconciliation wtih this. Could the Father have a son who has abilities that he does not have? No, not truly. A physical body can feel, sense, and even procreate (let's not go there) and a god w/o a body cannot.

The simple solution to this alleged flaw is that God can sense and can create, whether he has a body or not.

As John explains so clearly Christ did nothing that he did not already see his Father do. The example of rays of light from the sun (son) being the Son of God cannot work since light cannot be seen. I know you will want to resist this principle but put yourself between a light source and any object. Can you see the light between you and it, no. Light illuminates, highlights, but cannot be seen. Christ was seen as a physical God, not just a representation of the Father;s essence. It has been argued forcefully but not successfully that Christ was simply the physical manisfestation of the Father so the natural man could relate to God, and all would have been well if he had not performed the promise of eternal immortatliy by being the first fruits of them that slept (read resurrection). Where does that leave the essence of the Father, in the Tinitarian sense?

Okay, I think I get this. Let me make your argument even more extreme. Jesus did and could do a lot of things that the Father could not, because he was a corporeal being. He could, for example, be crucified and killed. So, the argument goes, for the Father to be equal to the Son, he must have a body.

I find this argument no more compelling than the age old adolescent philosphical query, "Can God create a rock so big he cannot lift it?" It was Jesus role to become God enfleshed, and carry out the mission of redemption. It's unnecessary to analyze the meaning of them being "co-equal" by suggesting that because Jesus took on limitations he became greater than the Father. This seems like sophistry to me.

God has made this so simple. It is a Father and Son relationship, that pure and simple. The family is going to be the eternal unit. That is why we are his sons and daughters not in some metapysical sense but in a literal thoughbeit spiritual sense. That is the pattern repreated over and over in the scriptures. It is easy to understand, comprehend, in the sense we see the order of things, and things as they really (Jacob 4:13), not to say any of us can comprehend Him fully yet.

Of course, the great danger in this suggested simple solution is that God's monotheism--an understanding shared by Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and Muslims--is severely compromised.

Since the Trinity concept is not taught anywhere in the Bible and was not adobpted until the 4th Century AD,

Of course, you know that Protestants and Catholics will disagree...arguing that the key aspects of the Trinity are shown in Scripture, and that Nicea simply formalized what had been taught for centuries.

should tells us that something has gone astray. If the Father fills the Universe how can we come to 'know' a loving God - according to the Trinitarian view God is unknowable.

Not so. Adam & Eve fellowshiped with him. Moses encountered him. The Holy Spirit anointed many--and indeed baptized and filled all members of the church, beginning with Acts. There is no agnosticism in the Christian church.

How can he be a loving Father, if he is equally 'Mother Nature' as not. Who do the angels worship if not God???? I assure you they do not play their harps, floating around seeking a bodiless, boundless, unseable, unknowable, God.

You cannot assure us. This is an appeal to man's opinion--that it is easier to worship a God that can be seen. And yet, the Old Testament is largely a battle against those who insist on worshiping visible gods.

How could he have a throne if he does not sit on it. How coule Stephen witness that he literally saw Jesus standing on the right hand of God, if he has no hand to begin with. Though it may be figurative about God's right hand man, it is not what he saw, or said. In my humble opinion the Trinitarian view of God is a convenient dogma that allows any and all doctrine to be embraced since the foundation is built on sand. Nothing can more confusing, nor heretical.

Wow. The foundational doctrine concerning the nature of God held by 99% of the Christian world, Protestant and Catholic, is all of that? Well, of course, you do not believe it. However, if you wish to convince those of us on the side of 2000 years of church history, you'll need to do better than such harsh accusations. The burden of proof falls upon those who offer innovative doctrines.

You can't tell me that 32,400 Christian sects or churches (less one) can have their own take on the Ahanasian creed, with diametrially opposed doctrine and still be considered God's church.

Sure I can. Because the doctrines of those churches mostly are not "diametrically opposed," but rather are largely in agreement. We differ on some areas of opinion, but agree on most essentials.

If the Trinity were true could God be the author of so much confusion. A house cannot stand against itself and that is exactly what Nicea gave us, a feud that will not be settled until Christ comes again and straightens out their mess.

The cause of the original splits between Catholic and Orthodox, and later, Catholic and Lutheran, were mostly about hierarchy and corruption, not doctrine--and certainly not the doctrine of the Trinity. The strongest challenges to the Trinity, quite frankly, claim in the 19th century, with Joseph Smith and Charles Taze Russell (Jehovah's Witnesses), and then again, in the 20th century with the Oneness Pentecostals (modalism).

[Guest Malcolm]

PC:

Orthodox and Catholics separated officially in 1054... the real reason was the "supremacy of the Pope in the Church", the "successor of Peter". However, "Filioque" was the spark, the actual reason, or rather, the "excuse" for the separation.

The Orthodox said that the Holy Spirit proceeds "from the Father"; the Catholics said the Holy Spirit proceeds "from the Father and from the Son" (Filioque)... and this was the theological "excuse" for their separation...

I see how the issue would drive some people out of a certain congregation but only if they ALREADY made up their mind about the subject. It is clear that The Father remained in heaven and Jesus prayed to the Father, talked about Him as the "intellectual" author of his work and the ultimate Judge with Jesus as our mediator. In Gethsemane The Father sent an angel to comfort Jesus in his darkest hour.

Jesus was resurrected as a physical being, he was God before the crucifixion and remains God after sitting at the right hand of the Father and the Holy Ghost remains in his function to infuse, direct and testify of the divinity of Christ and the truthfulness of the Gospel on the earth. So, there are three distinctive physical characters.

PC, I very much enjoy your posts. I have noted that you go to great lengths to portray the differences between denominations as "minor" and structural when in fact research points to, almost without exception, to theological interpretations. The beauty for me is that I did not have to "interpret" anything!! It was already there in black and white.

[prisonchaplain]

PC: PC, I very much enjoy your posts. I have noted that you go to great lengths to portray the differences between denominations as "minor" and structural when in fact research points to, almost without exception, to theological interpretations. The beauty for me is that I did not have to "interpret" anything!! It was already there in black and white.

Why do I suggest that the teachings of the many Christian sects are minor? Because, for most of us, they are not signficant enough that we would break fellowship, or consider one another outside the boundaries of Christian orthodoxy. Some examples:

The Catholic Church largely considers Protestants to be "separated bretheren," and does not actively evangelize us.

Likewise, while many Protestants have deep concerns about some Catholic distinctives (purgatory, prayer to Mary and saints, etc.), only a small minority of us would condemn them to hell for those teachings.

Many non-pentecostals believe that we err in our interpretation of the baptism in the Holy Spirit, and the meaning of the gifts of the Spirit--yet very few consider us other than misguided.

Likewise, we pentecostals do not argue that the rest of the Christian world is without the Holy Spirit, but rather that they are missing out on some tremendous gifts and empowerments that God has for us.

I could go on...but in reality, most Christians of various denominations call one another brother and sister, and we expect to see each other in heaven. I cannot forget that great Promise Keeper rally in WA DC, back in '97--nearly a million men, Catholic, Protestant, Evangelical, Baptist, Pentecostal, White, Black, Asian, Native American, Messianic Jewish, etc.--all gathered in Christian unity, to repent of our failures, and declare common cause in Christ.

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.