emeliza Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 it was explained to me like an egg. The shell is never the yolk and the yolk is never the white-but all three together are still only one egg.To often in the church we think of the trinity as modalism because we haven't take the time to try to understand it (i know i did anyway).Sometimes trinitarians explain it as modalism as well which can be confusing. I never completely understood it when I was a trinitarian, but part of that is because I have seen it explained too many different ways. I have heard the egg explanation and the water explanation. The egg works better for trying to understand it though. I think I understand it as well as I ever probably will...
bluebell Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 Sometimes trinitarians explain it as modalism as well which can be confusing. I never completely understood it when I was a trinitarian, but part of that is because I have seen it explained too many different ways. I have heard the egg explanation and the water explanation. The egg works better for trying to understand it though. I think I understand it as well as I ever probably will...yeah-the egg one doesn't work to well for me either. After all-the bible teaches that God the Father existed before Christ (but you can't have one part of an egg without the rest-then it's not an egg).Also-the bible teaches us that Christ only exists because of God the Father (but you can't claim that the shell brought the yolk into being etc.)Trinitarianism is confusing though and i guess the egg thing is probably as close as they can get.
Still_Small_Voice Posted June 14, 2007 Posted June 14, 2007 Saying God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are one personage will never make sense to me.Jesus cried out while hanging on the cross and asked why His Father forsook Him. All three members of the Godhead were present at the baptism of Christ. God spoke out of heaven and said that Jesus was His beloved Son and the Holy Ghost came down like a dove.Christ also taught that His Father was greater than Him (John 14:28).There is much evidence in the New Testament that the Godhead are three separate beings that all have one purpose.
LDSsister2007 Posted June 14, 2007 Posted June 14, 2007 Saying God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are one personage will never make sense to me.Jesus cried out while hanging on the cross and asked why His Father forsook Him. All three members of the Godhead were present at the baptism of Christ. God spoke out of heaven and said that Jesus was His beloved Son and the Holy Ghost came down like a dove.Christ also taught that His Father was greater than Him (John 14:28).There is much evidence in the New Testament that the Godhead are three separate beings that all have one purpose.I agree, I came from a former Southern baptist & church of christ before LDS & some of their teachings , I donot want to misquote anything & if I do PLEASE correct me, but I guess the monetheism(sp?) was how I thought they (the other churches) thought as well.
Doctor Steuss Posted June 14, 2007 Posted June 14, 2007 Saying God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are one personage will never make sense to me.Jesus cried out while hanging on the cross and asked why His Father forsook Him. All three members of the Godhead were present at the baptism of Christ. God spoke out of heaven and said that Jesus was His beloved Son and the Holy Ghost came down like a dove.Christ also taught that His Father was greater than Him (John 14:28).There is much evidence in the New Testament that the Godhead are three separate beings that all have one purpose.The thing that has helped me (to an extent) understand it is to imagine the Godhead not as a personage, but more as a divine essence of sorts. This divine essence has three distinct sentient minds (or centers of consciousness) that exist within it and that also comprise it.
Still_Small_Voice Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 The thing that has helped me (to an extent) understand it is to imagine the Godhead not as a personage, but more as a divine essence of sorts. This divine essence has three distinct sentient minds (or centers of consciousness) that exist within it and that also comprise it.That still doesn't make sense to me. (I know what God has shown me concerning His nature.) Even if it were true that all three were one God, it seems deceptive that He would reveal Himself as three separate beings if He was only one being.The New Testament is simple when the contents are read. Jesus prays to His Father. The Father also speaks out of heaven to Him. Christ talks continously in the book of John of the commission His Father gave Him.John 8:16-18 reads:16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me. 17 It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. 18 I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me. The truth is quite plain as the scriptures teach it.
emeliza Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 That still doesn't make sense to me. (I know what God has shown me concerning His nature.) Even if it were true that all three were one God, it seems deceptive that He would reveal Himself as three separate beings if He was only one being.I think he was just meaning.....a way to try and comprehend it. Not to believe that way yourself.
Doctor Steuss Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 I think he was just meaning.....a way to try and comprehend it. Not to believe that way yourself.Bingo.There_Is_Heavenly_Inspiration,The truth is indeed quite plain (and precious). It took me a long time to understand what exactly is entailed by the orthodox concept of the Trinity (and it took a lot of help from CaliforniaKid, Rhinomelon, and others), and I still donâ??t fully grasp it.
Still_Small_Voice Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 Doctor Steuss,I know you don't believe in the trinity doctrine. I guess I felt I needed to put in my two cents. Hope it was worth more than two cents.
Doctor Steuss Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Doctor Steuss,I know you don't believe in the trinity doctrine. I guess I felt I needed to put in my two cents. Hope it was worth more than two cents.It was worth much, much more.
Hans Mueller Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Just wanted to mention that there is only One True Church, and it has nothing to do with Joseph Smith, professional charlatan, or with his false book; All Mormons ought to be prepared for the fury of voluntarily being misledGood day to you sirs and mesdames, and I pray for youAlthoough yee among thou might pride yer'selves on being persecuted, o ye Protestant fabricators of extra Bible books and latter Day New Orleans Saints, why dontcha Listen to your hearts and obey Christ's Word on Earth, to the One True Church.My bad for watching PBS Frontline special on the Mor(m)ons, b/c now your fantasy life is going up in flame wars. Be prepared, fabricators of the Word.
Doctor Steuss Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Just wanted to mention that there is only One True Church, and it has nothing to do with Joseph Smith, professional charlatan, or with his false book; All Mormons ought to be prepared for the fury of voluntarily being misledGood day to you sirs and mesdames, and I pray for youAlthoough yee among thou might pride yer'selves on being persecuted, o ye Protestant fabricators of extra Bible books and latter Day New Orleans Saints, why dontcha Listen to your hearts and obey Christ's Word on Earth, to the One True Church.My bad for watching PBS Frontline special on the Mor(m)ons, b/c now your fantasy life is going up in flame wars. Be prepared, fabricators of the Word.If your ability to understand the Bible is anything like your ability to form a coherent sentence, then it is I that will be praying for you.
Hans Mueller Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 If your ability to understand the Bible is anything like your ability to form a coherent sentence, then it is I that will be praying for you.It has been said that people over the age of 55 have trouble with subordinate clauses; perhaps this is an obstacle for you: quite simply I mean, "Mormons get it wrong; you are heretics" The fundamental assumption of Latter Day New Orleans Saints is that any Joe from the road can create his own new addition to the Testimony of Christ: quite frankly I happen to think that is nonsense: Joe Smith should go into a creative writing seminar...
selek Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 It has been said that people over the age of 55 have trouble with subordinate clauses; perhaps this is an obstacle for you: quite simply I mean, "Mormons get it wrong; you are heretics" The fundamental assumption of Latter Day New Orleans Saints is that any Joe from the road can create his own new addition to the Testimony of Christ: quite frankly I happen to think that is nonsense: Joe Smith should go into a creative writing seminar...I'm under 55 and I have trouble with subordinate clauses.There can be only one Santa!Oh wait- it's a troll not an elf.Grow up, Hans. Your ignorance is tiresome.
Hans Mueller Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 I'm under 55 and I have trouble with subordinate clauses.There can be only one Santa!Oh wait- it's a troll not an elf.Grow up, Hans. Your ignorance is tiresome.Nice job not replying to the substance of the very important issues that I raised: the irrelevant and falsfied Mormon religion.You probably couldn't tell me what a subordinate clause was, or a religion was...you fool
Doctor Steuss Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Nice job not replying to the substance of the very important issues that I raised: the irrelevant and falsfied Mormon religion.You probably couldn't tell me what a subordinate clause was, or a religion was...you fool YIKES!!!Matt. 5: 22
Hans Mueller Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 I'm under 55 and I have trouble with subordinate clauses.There can be only one Santa!Oh wait- it's a troll not an elf.Grow up, Hans. Your ignorance is tiresome.Nice job not replying to the substance of the very important issues that I raised: the irrelevant and falsfied Mormon religion.You probably couldn't tell me what a subordinate clause was, or a religion was...you fool
selek Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Nice job not replying to the substance of the very important issues that I raised: the irrelevant and falsfied Mormon religion.You probably couldn't tell me what a subordinate clause was, or a religion was...you foolSticks and stones, Hans....sticks and stones.You probably couldn't tell me three major differences between your trademarked version of "Christianity" and the LDS.Why don't you back up your name calling with something substantive.Can you tell me why the LDS Church is false without resorting to name calling, or are you entirely bluster and venom?
Lightbearer Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Just wanted to mention that there is only One True Church, and it has nothing to do with Joseph Smith, professional charlatan, or with his false book; All Mormons ought to be prepared for the fury of voluntarily being misledGood day to you sirs and mesdames, and I pray for youAlthoough yee among thou might pride yer'selves on being persecuted, o ye Protestant fabricators of extra Bible books and latter Day New Orleans Saints, why dontcha Listen to your hearts and obey Christ's Word on Earth, to the One True Church.My bad for watching PBS Frontline special on the Mor(m)ons, b/c now your fantasy life is going up in flame wars. Be prepared, fabricators of the Word. New Orleans Saints? Are we talking about football? As for "only One True Church" yes, there is, it is known as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints restored to the earth by Jesus Christ through the Prophet Joseph Smith. And The Book of Mormon is more of God's word.
Hans Mueller Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 cool you know your Bible. big deal. People like you need to read the Book of Jonah. If you're trying to threaten me, then do it up front, and do it to my smiling Irish eyes instead of using the Book to speak for for you. Genesis 4: 8-10
Lightbearer Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 Nice job not replying to the substance of the very important issues that I raised: the irrelevant and falsfied Mormon religion.You probably couldn't tell me what a subordinate clause was, or a religion was...you foolWhat substance? Or is you aurgument "without body, parts, or passions?" Just remember "fools mock...but they shall mourn."
Doctor Steuss Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 It has been said that people over the age of 55 have trouble with subordinate clauses; perhaps this is an obstacle for you:It can be. Usually I have issues when they begin with a relative pronoun, but the obstacle is punctuation in lieu of comprehension. quite simply I mean, "Mormons get it wrong; you are heretics" What exactly are "Mormons" getting wrong that you evidently seem to believe that you are getting right?The fundamental assumption of Latter Day New Orleans SaintsI don't believe any here belong to this sect. I know of one poster who is an ordained Baptist minister, and LDS. I also know of two RLDS members. I don't think we have any people here that belong to the denomination you mention above. is that any Joe from the road can create his own new addition to the Testimony of Christ:If that's "the fundamental assumption" of the LDNOS sect that you seem to have had experience with, then it's no wonder that no one here is a member of it. quite frankly I happen to think that is nonsense:As do I; which would be why I don't adhere to any such belief. Joe Smith should go into a creative writing seminar...Iâ??m not sure who this â??Joe Smithâ? is. It couldnâ??t be the Prophet Joseph Smith as you are speaking in the present tense.I happen to think that if Paul were still living, he should have attended such a seminar.
selek Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 New Orleans Saints? Are we talking about football? As for "only One True Church" yes, there is, it is known as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints restored to the earth by Jesus Christ through the Prophet Joseph Smith. And The Book of Mormon is more of God's word.Lightbearer, Hans is engaging in the time-honored anti-Mo tactic of substituting inflammatory rhetoric for anything substantive. Note the time-worn catch phrase "Ol Joe Smith". Lacking the ability to express himself coherently, he will do so loudly.The third nail in the coffin is the twin tactic of a plethora of unsupported but nonetheless insulting accusations that we are dupes for beleiving, and of being as condescending as possible to what other people hold sacred.This is known in scholarly circles as the "rabid chihuahua" approach.This is easily the most serious threat to the Church, as evidenced by the incredible number of Mormon hearers who immediately renounced their temple covenants and burning their garments.cool you know your Bible. big deal. People like you need to read the Book of Jonah. If you're trying to threaten me, then do it up front, and do it to my smiling Irish eyes instead of using the Book to speak for for you. Genesis 4: 8-10I don't threaten- I was referring to the old nursery rhyme- "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me."So far, you've offered nothing but name calling.Is that because you have nothing else?What about those three differences I asked you to name?
Doctor Steuss Posted June 18, 2007 Posted June 18, 2007 cool you know your Bible. big deal. People like you need to read the Book of Jonah. I enjoy Jonah... especially his unfulfilled prophecy. If you're trying to threaten me, then do it up front, and do it to my smiling Irish eyes instead of using the Book to speak for for you. G-d did the threatening, not I. Genesis 4: 8-10And?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.