Another Trinity thread . . . sorry

[saemo]

From my lights LDS Doctrine is an Anchient Monarch/Eastern/Economic/Social Godhead-Trinity.

All seerate members haveing the True GOD DNA.

In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan - LDS JEDI KNIGHT.

God has never revealed He has DNA. This is a WAG.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Sind the LDS view of God demeans the very God that created you, I don't understand it either.

It does no such think Hoops try again.

Since the EV view of God demeans the very God that created you, I don't understand it either.

[Paloma]

Brenda and other LDS folk on this thread,

I realize it's difficult to try and "get into" the worldview of others, but I'm so glad that we're sincerely trying to do just that.

The question of how children learn about the Trinity has been dancing round my head since I read that query posed here.

I was raised in a Christian home. One of my earliest memories about God is my Mom (who was also my Sunday School teacher) giving me this memory verse: "We love Him because He first loved us" from 1 John. When we talked about that verse, she would tell me that God made me and He loved me. And so, at a very young age, I knew that God was personal and that He loved me. It never occurred to me to wonder what He looked like ... but I believed He loved me.

Then I remember hearing about Jesus, seeing pictures of Jesus with children around Him, and singing "Jesus loves me, this I know" and "Jesus loves the little children; all the children of the world" and "Jesus wants me for a sunbeam" ... etc. etc. etc.

I don't know how or when I "understood" the Trinity but I know that at a quite young age, I understood that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit were one God. I understood that we know what the Father is like, because Jesus revealed who He is ("He who has seen Me has seen the Father"). I understood that the Holy Spirit comes to live inside us when we believe in God; that He is God; and that He teaches us about God and salvation and obedience, guides us in how to live, convicts us of sin, etc.

It really wasn't a leap for me to "understand" the Trinity. It was a natural, logical and very dear 'reality' for me. And I think this is true for many, many Christians. The problem comes when we are questioned about our belief in the Trinity, especially by rather hostile detractors. Then we start talking about 'natures' and 'essences' and 'beings' and 'individuals' and 'persons' and 'mysteries' and the "otherness" of God in a way that often invites incredulity and ridicule.

But I hope you can understand that as a rule, we Trinitarians are not confused or convoluted in our own thinking and in our ability to know, relate to and follow God when we think of Him as one God in three persons.

In a similar way, my children believe in the trinitarian view of God. I don't recall ever specifically teaching them about the Trinity, but they are all believers (after their own journeys, just as I had my own journey that led to a personal conversion experience) and I know they understand and relate to God as I do.

I think it's striking that there are many different non-LDS believers on this board who are very different, and come from very different backgrounds. And yet when they speak of the Trinity and of their faith in God, I understand them. We understand each other at a deep level, much in the same way you LDS believers are unified in your worldview of God and the restored gospel.

In life and ministry, I've come across numerous questioners and new Christians. I've been privileged to have been part of the faith journey of many, where God has brought them to faith. And the question of the Trinity has very rarely been an issue. For some believers, I think they have a good grasp of the doctrine when they believe and for others I think they gradually gain more and more understanding after conversion.

We (LDS and non-LDS) have very different views of God. For us He's completely transcendant and He created humans, but is uniquely and purely God Himself. However, He contains within Himself human nature as well, because of the Incarnation. For us, the Incarnation is a central doctrine. I expect this is as difficult for LDS to understand as the Trinity, if not moreso. Besides the Incarnation, an area of important study for us is Christology. Perhaps this is so also, for LDS believers, but we probably approach Christology from different perspectives.

Although we believe God is a unique transcendant Being, we believe that He is personal. His attributes are personal (love, wisdom, etc.). And we know from the biblical history of God's dealings with people that He created us for Himself. He made us in His image. (Though He's not human, we know a lot about who He is since we're made in His image.) He's relational. He created Adam and Eve so that He could relate to them, they to Him, and they to each other. He wants to have an intimate relationship with people. ("You are my people and I will be your God".) He revealed Himself and communicated with His people, through anthropomorphic appearances in the Old Testament, through the burning bush to Moses, the pillar of cloud by day and fire by night as He led the Israelites from Egypt and through the desert, through the "still, small voice" to Elijah, etc. etc. etc.

We read descriptions of God as our Shepherd, Husband, King - and experience these relationships in our walk with Him. And we have pictures of being sheltered by His wings, held up by His everlasting arms, etc.

Although I have never thought of God as human (indeed, I've been thankful for His transcendence and 'otherness') I've never thought of Him as anything but loving and personal. (When I say loving, I recognize He's also a God of holiness and justice, and holds us accountable to live according the fruit of the Spirit.)

I think that revelation plays a large part in our understanding of the Trinity. We believe that the Holy Spirit is God and that He indwells us and teaches us deep truth. Our spirits take and understand the truth that He instils in us. (In no way am I trying to say that we understand truth and you don't or that 'our' truth is better than 'your' truth. I'm just trying to help you understand how we access and understand the Trinity doctrine and what it means to us.)

In a sense, just as you live and breathe "prayer" (as we do),which may be difficult to explain to an unbeliever, and just as you experience 'something' or "Someone' in the temple that you can't express but you deeply understand and appreciate ... so is our deep understanding and appreciation of the Trinity doctrine for us.

[rhinomelon]

Hello Brenda, good questions. If you look at my sig line, you'll see two threads linked. The one entitled "Trinity, Trinity, Trinity" is the best example I've encountered of LDS and non-LDS discussing the Trinity for the purpose of understanding it. You might want to read it through, see if it helps.

I would participate a bit more here, but I'm trying to get a big term paper done at the moment, so that's taking up most of my time.

Take care

[Doctor Steuss]

Three Candles

Light three candles. Notice that there are three separate flames. Now, with help from another set of hands, tilt the tops of the candles so that the flames come together as one flame. Together they are one flame, yet three separate flames.

[...]

This is probably one of the best (if not, the best) metaphores for the Trinity that I've heard.

[saemo]

This is probably one of the best (if not, the best) metaphores for the Trinity that I've heard.

Yeah, I like it too. Justin Martyr used first (as far as I know):

Chapter CXXVIII.

"And that Christ being Lord, and God the Son of God, and appearing

formerly in power as Man, and Angel, and in the glory of fire as at the

bush, so also was manifested at the judgment executed on Sodom, has

been demonstrated fully by what has been said." Then I repeated once

more all that I had previously quoted from Exodus, about the vision in

the bush, and the naming of Joshua (Jesus), and continued: "And do not

suppose, sirs, that I am speaking superfluously when I repeat these

words frequently: but it is because I know that some wish to anticipate

these remarks, and to say that the power sent from the Father of all

which appeared to Moses, or to Abraham, or to Jacob, is called an Angel

because He came to men (for by Him the commands of the Father have been

proclaimed to men); is called Glory, because He appears in a vision

sometimes that cannot be borne; is called a Man, and a human being,

because He appears arrayed in such forms as the Father pleases; and

they call Him the Word, because He carries tidings from the Father to

men: but maintain that this power is indivisible and inseparable from

the Father, just as they say that the light of the sun on earth is

indivisible and inseparable from the sun in the heavens; as when it

sinks, the light sinks along with it; so the Father, when He chooses,

say they, causes His power to spring forth, and when He chooses, He

makes it return to Himself. In this way, they teach, He made the

angels. But it is proved that there are angels who always exist, and

are never reduced to that form out of which they sprang. And that this

power which the prophetic word calls God, as has been also amply

demonstrated, and Angel, is not numbered [as different] in name only

like the light of the sun but is indeed something numerically distinct,

I have discussed briefly in what has gone before; when I asserted that

this power was begotten from the Father, by His power and will, but not

by abscission, as if the essence of the Father were divided; as all

other things partitioned and divided are not the same after as before

they were divided: and, for the sake of example, I took the case of

fires kindled from a fire, which we see to be distinct from it, and yet

that from which many can be kindled is by no means made less, but

remains the same." (Justin Martyr, c.150-160)

[Brenda]

Brenda and other LDS folk on this thread,

I realize it's difficult to try and "get into" the worldview of others, but I'm so glad that we're sincerely trying to do just that.

The question of how children learn about the Trinity has been dancing round my head since I read that query posed here.

I was raised in a Christian home. One of my earliest memories about God is my Mom (who was also my Sunday School teacher) giving me this memory verse: "We love Him because He first loved us" from 1 John. When we talked about that verse, she would tell me that God made me and He loved me. And so, at a very young age, I knew that God was personal and that He loved me. It never occurred to me to wonder what He looked like ... but I believed He loved me.

Then I remember hearing about Jesus, seeing pictures of Jesus with children around Him, and singing "Jesus loves me, this I know" and "Jesus loves the little children; all the children of the world" and "Jesus wants me for a sunbeam" ... etc. etc. etc.

I don't know how or when I "understood" the Trinity but I know that at a quite young age, I understood that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit were one God. I understood that we know what the Father is like, because Jesus revealed who He is ("He who has seen Me has seen the Father"). I understood that the Holy Spirit comes to live inside us when we believe in God; that He is God; and that He teaches us about God and salvation and obedience, guides us in how to live, convicts us of sin, etc.

It really wasn't a leap for me to "understand" the Trinity. It was a natural, logical and very dear 'reality' for me. And I think this is true for many, many Christians. The problem comes when we are questioned about our belief in the Trinity, especially by rather hostile detractors. Then we start talking about 'natures' and 'essences' and 'beings' and 'individuals' and 'persons' and 'mysteries' and the "otherness" of God in a way that often invites incredulity and ridicule.

But I hope you can understand that as a rule, we Trinitarians are not confused or convoluted in our own thinking and in our ability to know, relate to and follow God when we think of Him as one God in three persons.

In a similar way, my children believe in the trinitarian view of God. I don't recall ever specifically teaching them about the Trinity, but they are all believers (after their own journeys, just as I had my own journey that led to a personal conversion experience) and I know they understand and relate to God as I do.

I think it's striking that there are many different non-LDS believers on this board who are very different, and come from very different backgrounds. And yet when they speak of the Trinity and of their faith in God, I understand them. We understand each other at a deep level, much in the same way you LDS believers are unified in your worldview of God and the restored gospel.

In life and ministry, I've come across numerous questioners and new Christians. I've been privileged to have been part of the faith journey of many, where God has brought them to faith. And the question of the Trinity has very rarely been an issue. For some believers, I think they have a good grasp of the doctrine when they believe and for others I think they gradually gain more and more understanding after conversion.

We (LDS and non-LDS) have very different views of God. For us He's completely transcendant and He created humans, but is uniquely and purely God Himself. However, He contains within Himself human nature as well, because of the Incarnation. For us, the Incarnation is a central doctrine. I expect this is as difficult for LDS to understand as the Trinity, if not moreso. Besides the Incarnation, an area of important study for us is Christology. Perhaps this is so also, for LDS believers, but we probably approach Christology from different perspectives.

Although we believe God is a unique transcendant Being, we believe that He is personal. His attributes are personal (love, wisdom, etc.). And we know from the biblical history of God's dealings with people that He created us for Himself. He made us in His image. (Though He's not human, we know a lot about who He is since we're made in His image.) He's relational. He created Adam and Eve so that He could relate to them, they to Him, and they to each other. He wants to have an intimate relationship with people. ("You are my people and I will be your God".) He revealed Himself and communicated with His people, through anthropomorphic appearances in the Old Testament, through the burning bush to Moses, the pillar of cloud by day and fire by night as He led the Israelites from Egypt and through the desert, through the "still, small voice" to Elijah, etc. etc. etc.

We read descriptions of God as our Shepherd, Husband, King - and experience these relationships in our walk with Him. And we have pictures of being sheltered by His wings, held up by His everlasting arms, etc.

Although I have never thought of God as human (indeed, I've been thankful for His transcendence and 'otherness') I've never thought of Him as anything but loving and personal. (When I say loving, I recognize He's also a God of holiness and justice, and holds us accountable to live according the fruit of the Spirit.)

I think that revelation plays a large part in our understanding of the Trinity. We believe that the Holy Spirit is God and that He indwells us and teaches us deep truth. Our spirits take and understand the truth that He instils in us. (In no way am I trying to say that we understand truth and you don't or that 'our' truth is better than 'your' truth. I'm just trying to help you understand how we access and understand the Trinity doctrine and what it means to us.)

In a sense, just as you live and breathe "prayer" (as we do),which may be difficult to explain to an unbeliever, and just as you experience 'something' or "Someone' in the temple that you can't express but you deeply understand and appreciate ... so is our deep understanding and appreciation of the Trinity doctrine for us.

A very thoughtful post, and I thank you. I'm beginning to see that I'll probably never understand the Trinity to the point that I'd be comfortable explaining it to someone. But I am learning that you don't lump the three into one, as I had thought. Also, that you (or maybe just Saemo) believe that Jesus has a body. This is a surprise to me. Is this commonly believed among Christians? If so, then I've been very mistaken. But through the confusing haze of all this, I continue to see a lot of things in common between our doctrines. The three in one concept, is compatible to ours. God is our creator/father is also compatible. Christ has a body--compatible. The love and concern, the relationship we strive for with God--again, very compatible. Yes, we do have our differences, but the commonalities outnumber them.

The flame analogy is nice. Really it is. But it just didn't help me. Poetic imagery isn't what I need. I just don't think of God as a flame. I need to be able to think of him as he is. I can't pray to a flame, nor to a water molecule, though I appreciate that it works for you and others. I need to know what God is, and I'm not sure that's possible in the trinitarian framework. Again, I say this with all respect for your beliefs.

Thanks for your help.

[Hoops22]

(or maybe just Saemo) believe that Jesus has a body.

Not just saemo

This is a surprise to me. Is this commonly believed among Christians?

I think so. Everywhere I've been - which is a lot.

If so, then I've been very mistaken. But through the confusing haze of all this, I continue to see a lot of things in common between our doctrines. The three in one concept, is compatible to ours.

Don't know that I would use the word compatible. Similar, perhaps, in a small way. But the differences seem very large to me.

God is our creator/father is also compatible. Christ has a body--compatible. The love and concern, the relationship we strive for with God--again, very compatible. Yes, we do have our differences, but the commonalities outnumber them.

Wouldn't you say it is the qualitative differences that matter the most?

[Brenda]

Wouldn't you say it is the qualitative differences that matter the most?

Perhaps, but I'm really trying to "reach across the aisle" so to speak. I'm trying to focus on our common beliefs, because, frankly the parts that differ from that which I'm familiar, are too difficult for me to comprehend.

[Cold Steel]

If the Trinity can be composed of three distinct beings, then why cannot it be comprised of more? In other words, why stop at three? I say this because:

• God [Elohim] states, "Let us make man in our image."
  
• God made man in his image, male and female. Doesn't this imply a female aspect of God?
  
• Those saved by the atonement and who receive Eternal life become "joint heirs" with Christ and "like God."
  
• Christ prayed regarding the Twelve: "that they may be One, even as we are One." This is a direct analogy.
  
• Christ is in the "express image" of the Father, and we become like Christ, inheriting all that the Father has.
  

Yes, it is stated in scripture that there is but ONE God, and according to Isaiah, God knows of no others. This would seem to be a death knell to Christianity, yet many scriptures also indicate a plurality (Psalms 110:1-2 and others). Mankind is specifically called the "sons" of God and "heirs." And it is God who uses the familial form of "Father." Is this mere metaphor? Metaphors and analogies are, by definition, true to life and applicable to life. Thus, how can there be a "Father" and a "Son" without a "Mother"?

As I see it, the scriptures teach that the Godhead is comprised by three divine beings, but it doesn't exactly state that three's the limit. In other words, if three can be one, then why not 30? Or 300? Or 3 billion?

Joseph Smith said many times that he was holding out on us. He wasn't teaching us everything that had been taught to him because, he said, we could not bear it. We couldn't wrap our minds around some things. We don't really feel like we need more than we have, but look how different the Christian concept of God is from the ancient Jewish concept of God. And if you traditional Christians think you've gotten away with the "Trinity" explanation, you need to read some of the Jewish critics who consider the Trinity nothing but a none-too-clever end run around monotheism.

If one reads the New Testament, it's apparent that the writers drew a distinction between "God" and Jesus. They almost always wrote about them as if they were two separate beings, two distinct entities. Even during the stoning of Stephen, the martyr said he saw Jesus standing on the right hand of who? God. So why did the writers of the New Testament do this if they believed that Jesus, too, was God? They did it because many of their readers couldn't handle the advanced teaching of their oneness. Jesus angered the Jews by announcing that he was Jehovah, but this was not something the ancient church openly taught, as far as we know. We see it developed more in John's Apocalypse, and we get a hint of it in the appearance of Jesus to Saul, but it's mostly hidden.

If we read the scriptures carefully, we can see that Jesus becomes like the Father and that we become like Jesus. It doesn't make sense that we all are "perfected" by a physical resurrection, and yet the Father would be a being of spirit.

[Paloma]

A very thoughtful post, and I thank you. I'm beginning to see that I'll probably never understand the Trinity to the point that I'd be comfortable explaining it to someone. But I am learning that you don't lump the three into one, as I had thought. Also, that you (or maybe just Saemo) believe that Jesus has a body. This is a surprise to me. Is this commonly believed among Christians? If so, then I've been very mistaken. But through the confusing haze of all this, I continue to see a lot of things in common between our doctrines. The three in one concept, is compatible to ours. God is our creator/father is also compatible. Christ has a body--compatible. The love and concern, the relationship we strive for with God--again, very compatible. Yes, we do have our differences, but the commonalities outnumber them.

The flame analogy is nice. Really it is. But it just didn't help me. Poetic imagery isn't what I need. I just don't think of God as a flame. I need to be able to think of him as he is. I can't pray to a flame, nor to a water molecule, though I appreciate that it works for you and others. I need to know what God is, and I'm not sure that's possible in the trinitarian framework. Again, I say this with all respect for your beliefs.

Thanks for your help.

Brenda, you're right that we don't lump the three into one, and thanks for seeing that clearly.

I agree with Saemo that Jesus has a body. And yes, this is commonly believed among Christians.

He became human (took on a human nature), which is basically the doctrine of the Incarnation. Jesus is God "with us" in the fullest way possible. He became human as we are - the ultimate expression of God's wanting to reach us personally and show us His truth. We believe that Jesus is both fully divine and fully human. And since the Incarnation when he took on a human nature, Jesus is eternally God and Man.

While no doubt there are Christians who haven't thought of or don't know whether Jesus still has a body after His death and resurrection, our doctrine is that He is does still have a body and will forever be both fully God and fully man (two natures in the one person of Jesus Christ, the divine Son).

Biblical reasons for this belief would include his post resurrection appearances in Luke 24 where He was seen in his human body with nail-scarred hands and where He ate food with His disciples. Further proof to us would be the words of Acts 1:11: "This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw Him go into heaven." In the book of Revelation, Jesus appears to John as "one like a son of man". We understand that Jesus' humanity is crucial to His work of redemption and intercession for us, but that His divinity is absolutely crucial as well. And so, to us, He is fully God and fully human eternally.

I appreciate what you're saying about our commonalities. Yes, I know that there are major differences between us. But what I hear you saying, and what I feel myself, is that we want to get a sense of how we see God and relate to Him.

Before I became close friends with some LDS believers, I would tend to focus on their "different' beliefs rather than on their faith. And I think they'd say the same. In fact, we've talked about this. But now that we've prayed together and seen each other's deep faith and yearning for God and sincere desire to live for Him, our differences melt away. Yes, the differences are still there, and yes, they matter. But that's something that God can and will reveal and answer. For now, we believe that He is pleased with our love for each other and with our humility in that we don't have to be "right" - just true to His teaching as we understand it.

Above, Rhinomelon mentioned the thread which discusses and explains the Trinity. I think he has it in his signature. I strongly recommend that thread for its depth and clarity, as well as its very civil tone.

[rhinomelon]

As I see it, the scriptures teach that the Godhead is comprised by three divine beings, but it doesn't exactly state that three's the limit. In other words, if three can be one, then why not 30? Or 300? Or 3 billion?

There's a distinction between thinking of the Trinity as some kind of theory, and thinking of the Trinity as a personal God who has revealed Himself to us. Mainstream Christianity takes the latter approach, which means questions like the above have no real meaning. The Trinity is a direct result of Christianity's experience of God, not some theoretical construct developed in a lab somewhere. It's like me getting to know you, facts about your life and your personality, and then saying, "Well, theoretically, couldn't you be a seven-foot-tall African-American woman in the WNBA?" Well, sure, in theory anything is possible, but in reality, you've revealed yourself to be a specific person, so what's the point of trying to get you to be something other than what you've revealed yourself to be?

Take care, everyone

[Hoops22]

Perhaps, but I'm really trying to "reach across the aisle" so to speak. I'm trying to focus on our common beliefs, because, frankly the parts that differ from that which I'm familiar, are too difficult for me to comprehend.

I don't expect you to reach across tha aisle at the expense of any core doctrine you have.

[Brenda]

I don't expect you to reach across tha aisle at the expense of any core doctrine you have.

I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying I might compromise or bend on some of my core doctrine? If so, then no worries. That'll never happen. But reaching across the aisle in effort to understand each other and in working together to make this world a better place, is exactly what we are supposed to do.

I see other Christians, and even religious non-Christians, as sincere in their beliefs and I also strongly suspect that many of our beliefs (including those of other world religions), different as they may be, originated from the same source. So some commonalities have survived through time. That's where I'm focusing.

Some people may not think of me as a fellow Christian, but I don't return the sentiment.

[Cold Steel]

The Trinity is a direct result of Christianity's experience of God, not some theoretical construct developed in a lab somewhere. It's like me getting to know you, facts about your life and your personality, and then saying, "Well, theoretically, couldn't you be a seven-foot-tall African-American woman in the WNBA?" Well, sure, in theory anything is possible, but in reality, you've revealed yourself to be a specific person, so what's the point of trying to get you to be something other than what you've revealed yourself to be?

In the LDS context, though, God moves from what we know from the biblical accounts to how He is further revealed by the prophet of the Restoration. It's not theoretical to us, in that it's not something that was drawn from a hat or concocted by a think tank or study group.

It is, in fact, a principle found in the New Testament. We're all on a journey to the divine likeness. God became as we are so that we can become as He is. His desire isn't that we simply attain what we were before the Fall. Man, we're told, is God's crowning achievement and has the spark of divinity within him.

When I was a protestant, I wrestled with why God created man. Were we a spontaneous creation? Why did God create us in innocence and then expose us to a master deceiver? And why weren't the angels God's crowning achievement? They looked like people, had innate intelligence, knew good from evil and sang the praises of God. Why should they be awed by a couple of naked humans in a garden?

The LDS view is based in divine oneness.

We're linked by families, and our works are based on raising each other up and the Master raised us up. Angels aren't better than people; they are people. They are us. And God's work and glory is to bring to pass our immortality and eternal life. The King Follet sermon brings God into crystal clarity. He once was we are and is now an exalted being of virtually unlimited power, glory and intelligence. It's a new doctrine, but is not theoretical. It's a claim. A teaching. We freely admit that it is not taught in the scriptures, but we do maintain that our destiny is scriptural. When we see God, we will not be like Adam and Eve, but we will be "like God," for we shall see Him as He is.

Light three candles. Notice that there are three separate flames. Now, with help from another set of hands, tilt the tops of the candles so that the flames come together as one flame. Together they are one flame, yet three separate flames.

This is indeed a great metaphor, but it does not agree with God's pronouncements through Isaiah, at least as the Jews see it.

• Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and
  beside me there is no God
  .
  
  

• Is there a God beside me? Yea,
  there is no God
  ; I know not any.
  
  

• I am the LORD, and
  there is none else
  , there is
  no God beside me
  ...
  .
  
  

• ...there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and
  there is none else
  .
  
  

• ...he created [the Earth] not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and
  there is none else
  .
  
  

• ...and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour;
  there is none beside me
  .
  
  

• ...for I am God, and
  there is none else
  .
  
  

All of these are from two chapters and the general idea is repeated over and over. Yet Jesus appears to John on Patmos and declares Himself to be the "Alpha and Omega," the "first and the last."

Based on the above, and the fact that the New Testament writers never identified Jesus with being God (but distinguished "God" from "Jesus"), are we to say the Trinity is "theoretical"? No, because the New Testament offers us a different view of God than generally given in the Old Testament. It is further light and knowledge, just as is the King Follet discourse by Joseph Smith.

[Hoops22]

I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying I might compromise or bend on some of my core doctrine?

I wouldn't think so. NOr will I. Where are you wrong and that error could effect your immortal soul, I hold to what I think is right.

If so, then no worries. That'll never happen. But reaching across the aisle in effort to understand each other and in working together to make this world a better place, is exactly what we are supposed to do.

I'm not convinced that is the highest calling. Conversion to truth often require discomfort, not the makings of a better world.

However, if you mean to serve Christ by serving others, then, yes, agreed.

I see other Christians, and even religious non-Christians, as sincere in their beliefs and I also strongly suspect that many of our beliefs (including those of other world religions), different as they may be, originated from the same source.

I don't see how the same source would invite such differing vews.

So some commonalities have survived through time. That's where I'm focusing.

Some people may not think of me as a fellow Christian, but I don't return the sentiment.

It doesn't matter what people think, it matters if it's true or not.

[Tanyan]

The Trinity, MY, My.

In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan - LDS JEDI KNIGHT.

[mysteryman]

And this obviously true statement has no bearing? Talk about thinking rationally.

Well, some do and some don't. You and mola apparently don't.

Sind the LDS view of God demeans the very God that created you, I don't understand it either.

Well if it makes sense then explain it to me. How can a being separate a part of it become the son of the other part, and then a third part is a spirit, and yet they are all one god but three persons. How can three persons be one god? Its nonsense! And because everyone knows its nonsense, the general excuse is that our finite minds can't understand it, when really it is our logical minds can't understand nonsense.

[Hoops22]

Its nonsense! And because everyone knows its nonsense, the general excuse is that our finite minds can't understand it, when really it is our logical minds can't understand nonsense.

Happy Easter!!

I'll get to this soon.

[rhinomelon]

How can three persons be one god? Its nonsense! And because everyone knows its nonsense, the general excuse is that our finite minds can't understand it, when really it is our logical minds can't understand nonsense.

I understand the doctrine, and I think it makes great sense, even though it's hard to understand in all the particulars. And there are many others who understand it as well, so your statement is categorically false. Please read the thread in my sig line for more info. Thanks!

Take care, everyone

[e=mc2]

rhinomelon:

The Trinity is a direct result of Christianity's experience of God

What experience of God? They claim there is no more revelation, no more prophets, apostles, etc. They claim God is incomprehensible, they say God is without body, parts, or passions. God is wholly other. In that case, they don't experience God, they insulate themselves from Him. They can't experience God in the Trinity, it's an unsolvable mystery based on Greek metaphysics, not ancient revelatory thought as the scriptures teach.

[Brenda]

I wouldn't think so. NOr will I. Where are you wrong and that error could effect your immortal soul, I hold to what I think is right.

I'm not convinced that is the highest calling. Conversion to truth often require discomfort, not the makings of a better world.

However, if you mean to serve Christ by serving others, then, yes, agreed.

I don't see how the same source would invite such differing vews.

So some commonalities have survived through time. That's where I'm focusing.

It doesn't matter what people think, it matters if it's true or not.

Working together to improve the world may or may not be our purpose; that's not the point. It is definately a worthy purpose, among many others. I firmly believe you will convert more people through love and understanding, rather than through antagonism.

I do see how concepts from the same source can morph into all kinds of views, given enough time. Haven't you ever played the game "telephone"?

Hoops, I don't get you. I see you are very strong minded, and that's not bad at all, but you appear quick to assume the role of contender in a fight. I'm really trying not to fight. I just want to understand and compare. No other agenda than that.

Maybe I'm just misreading your posts.

[Brenda]

I understand the doctrine, and I think it makes great sense, even though it's hard to understand in all the particulars. And there are many others who understand it as well, so your statement is categorically false. Please read the thread in my sig line for more info. Thanks!

Take care, everyone

Hi, I'd love to hear a simple, short, concise explanation as to what you believe God is, w/o having to travel through a long thread. If God were to appear infront of me and speak to me, what would I see? Also, where was God when Jesus lived here on the earth? Was he here, as a part of Jesus, or somewhere else? And please, no metaphores.

It just occurred to me that I don't ever see anyone here asking the LDS what we believe God is. That could be for several reasons.

1. They don't care. I doubt this is it.

2. It hasn't come up yet, or it hasn't occurred to anyone to ask. Not likely. This is an inquisitive bunch.

3. They already know. Bingo.

[Brenda]

Well if it makes sense then explain it to me. How can a being separate a part of it become the son of the other part, and then a third part is a spirit, and yet they are all one god but three persons. How can three persons be one god? Its nonsense! And because everyone knows its nonsense, the general excuse is that our finite minds can't understand it, when really it is our logical minds can't understand nonsense.

Ok, but let's not call it nonsense. It part of their doctrine, and we need to respect that.

[rhinomelon]

What experience of God? They claim there is no more revelation, no more prophets, apostles, etc. They claim God is incomprehensible, they say God is without body, parts, or passions. God is wholly other. In that case, they don't experience God, they insulate themselves from Him. They can't experience God in the Trinity, it's an unsolvable mystery based on Greek metaphysics, not ancient revelatory thought as the scriptures teach.

I could not disagree more strongly. Christianity's experience of God is completely compatible with God being wholly other, unembodied, beyond our full comprehension. Scripture is full of both man's experience of God and God's otherness and distinction from creation. Christianity, at its core, is a religion that teaches that God, though He is beyond our full comprehension and wonderful beyond our wildest imagination, reveals Himself to us and interacts with us by His grace. Our experience of God happens because God reveals Himself.

As far as experiencing the Trinity, once again that is the core of the Christian faith. I believe it was C.S. Lewis who wrote that even when a Christian does a simple thing like praying, he is caught up in the life and relationship of the Trinity. For it is the Holy Spirit within us who wills us to pray and helps us pray, through the bridge provided by the incarnate Son, to the Father. Every single thing the Christian does assumes the Trinity, even if the Christian himself does not understand it fully.

And as a mainstream Christian, I fully believe that Greek metaphysics is compatible in many areas with ancient biblical revelation. LDS must think this, too, given the plethora of Greek philosophical concepts that dot LDS theology.

Hi, I'd love to hear a simple, short, concise explanation as to what you believe God is, w/o having to travel through a long thread. If God were to appear infront of me and speak to me, what would I see? Also, where was God when Jesus lived here on the earth? Was he here, as a part of Jesus, or somewhere else? And please, no metaphores.

The triune God is one God in three distinct persons. The persons are not separate Gods, nor is there only one Person wearing three different "masks". If God were to appear in front of me, I would likely see Christ, who is the image of the invisible God. Who knows what other glories I would see? When the Son was incarnate, God was still everywhere, omnipresent, but present in a special way in Christ. The Father and the Spirit were not incarnate in Jesus Christ.

There, no metaphors, short and sweet. Of course, the definition is one thing; understanding it is quite another, and metaphors may be required (as is the willingness to think outside one's theological boxes for the sake of understanding).

Take care, everyone