Diferent Trinity View Points

[Kreno]

I could use some help on the trinity (Niciean Creed) vs. LDS View.

I'm in a discussion about "the God head" with a Assembly of God minister, about the Godhead.

Personally, I think he's in denial. I given several OT and NT scriptures and gone into the Gospel Principles book.

Any other Ideas?

HELP PLEASE

[thesometimesaint]

The Bible nowhere speaks of a Trinity. But it does speak of a Godhead. A Social Trinity if you will.

[bluebell]

I don't think this is an issue that can be solved with an appeal to the bible. Extra-biblical interpretations have to be used somewhere on all accounts. Why waste time trying to prove through logic that the trinity is right and the concept of the LDS godhead is wrong or vice versa?

[mfbukowski]

Research the Council of Nicea which defined the doctrine at Constantine's behest, to avoid a war. You can read between the lines even on this Evangelical site to see that.

http://www.gotquestions.org/council-of-Nicea.html

It is fourth century Neoplatonic philosophy- and not biblical in any way whatsoever.

Wikipedia should work fine too.

[Rob Bowman]

thesometimesaint,

You wrote:

The Bible nowhere speaks of a Trinity. But it does speak of a Godhead. A Social Trinity if you will.

CFR, if you please.

[bluebell]

thesometimesaint,

You wrote:

CFR, if you please.

The KJV of the bible uses the term 'godhead' three times.

Colossians 2:9, Acts, 17:29, and Romans 1:20

The term 'trinity' doesn't appear at all in the KJV (i have no idea about other versions).

[Whiskeypete]

CFR, if you please.

I agree, please list all the places in the Bible where the Trinity is not mentioned.

[Kreno]

thanks everyone

[mfbukowski]

I agree, please list all the places in the Bible where the Trinity is not mentioned.

The only problem is that you should have labeled that post:

"Warning: Explosion hazard.

Do not read this post with a mouth full."

:rofl:

[zerinus]

I don't think this is an issue that can be solved with an appeal to the bible. Extra-biblical interpretations have to be used somewhere on all accounts. Why waste time trying to prove through logic that the trinity is right and the concept of the LDS godhead is wrong or vice versa?

The OP question is not very clear. I am not sure what kind of discussion he is having with the “Assembly of God minister,” and what kind of help he is asking for. But one thing is true, that the LDS understanding of the Trinity or the Godhead has better scriptural support than the traditional Christian one does.

thesometimesaint,

You wrote:

CFR, if you please.

See above. The Mormon doctrine is more biblical than the Evangelical one.

The KJV of the bible uses the term 'godhead' three times.

Colossians 2:9, Acts, 17:29, and Romans 1:20

The term 'trinity' doesn't appear at all in the KJV (i have no idea about other versions).

In those verses the word Godhead is not used in the same sense that it is used by Latter-day Saints:

Colossians 2

:9

9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Acts 17

:29

29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.

Romans 1

:20

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

In these verses the word “Godhead” is used to mean “divinity,” “divine attributes,” or the “Divine”. It basically means “God”.

I agree, please list all the places in the Bible where the Trinity is not mentioned.

[cdowis]

Here is the basics of the "Trinity" -- LDS vs nonLDS.

We both believe in a trinity, just that we define them differently. The trinity implies oneness.

The Nicene creed uses the term homoousia, or one substance.

The LDS accepts what Christ taught in John 17:19-23, where we (the disciples) can become One with the Father, in the same manner that Christ is One with the Father, "perfect in one". Not one substance, but one in the same manner that a man and a woman become "one flesh".

So, the choice is to accept what Christ taught, or what Constantine taught.

A historical note: Constantine banished all of those bishops who voted against the Nicene creed. It was clearly a political statement and not a doctrinal one.

The historical Christian church accepted his leadership because he protected them, and the historic Christians are still paying the price for that protection. As Christ said, you cannot put new wine into old wine skins, but they will burst. The nature of the Godhead was restored through modern revelation.

[Calm]

The trinity implies oneness.

I am curious as to when the idea that "trinity" meant "tri-unity" first appeared since the origin of the word "trinity" means the "state of three" http://dictionary.re.../browse/trinity

[Calm]

It was clearly a political statement and not a doctrinal one.

Is there any reason why a statement can't be both?

[ChristKnight]

I could use some help on the trinity (Niciean Creed) vs. LDS View.

I'm in a discussion about "the God head" with a Assembly of God minister, about the Godhead.

Personally, I think he's in denial. I given several OT and NT scriptures and gone into the Gospel Principles book.

Any other Ideas?

HELP PLEASE

What exactly is he saying?

I think one of the problems with these sorts of discussions is terminology. Traditional Christians use the words "person" and "being" in a way that we don't normally use them in everyday language. Latter-day Saints use these words interchangeably, just like we do in everyday language. Traditional Christians use "person" to refer to something different from what "being" is referring to. So, when a Latter-day Saint says that we believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three Beings, a Traditional Christian will respond by saying that that belief is heresy, since they are one Being (and three distinct Persons). The problem is that we aren't talking about the same thing, since we LDS are not using the language of the Council of Nicaea and other Councils. This is why these discussions sometimes go nowhere, since we're talking past each other.

So, you should get him to define the words "person" and "being" for you to start.

[cdowis]

Is there any reason why a statement can't be both?

Of course, but I was making the point that C clearly had no interest in the doctrine, as long as the council could unite behind the creed. Those who refused to accept it -- they paid the price.

[Kreno]

What exactly is he saying?

Thank You for great enlightning conversation

[Ivan Komotios]

TheAthanasion Creed

Nowthis is the catholic faith:

1) Whosoever will be saved, before all things it isnecessary that he hold the catholic faith; (2) Which faith except every one dokeep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.(3) Andthe catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity inUnity; (4) Neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance. (5) Forthere is one Person of the Father, another of the Son and another of the HolySpirit. (6) But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spiritis all one, the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal

(33) Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, andinferior to the Father as touching His manhood.

Confounding means not mixing them up, The Father isn'tthe Son, the Son isn't the Father etc.

Substance is a synonym for Godhead the same as Essencebeing or God

Trinity

USED TO EXPRESS THE DOCTRINE OF THE UNITY OF GOD AS SUBSISTING INTHREE DISTINCT PERSONS. THIS WORD IS DERIVED FROM THE GR. trias, firstused by Theophilus (A.D. 168-183), or from the Lat. trinitas, first usedby Tertullian (A.D. 220), to express this doctrine.

The propositions involved in the doctrine are these: (1.) That Godis one, and that there is but one God (Deut. 6:4; 1 Kings 8:60; Isa. 44:6; Mark 12:29, 32; John 10:30). (2.)That the Father is a distinct divine Person (hypostasis, subsistentia,persona, suppositum intellectuale), distinct from the Son and the HolySpirit. (3.) That Jesus Christ was truly God, and yet was a Person distinctfrom the Father and the Holy Spirit. (4.) That the Holy Spirit is also adistinct divine Person.

Easton Bible Dictionary

Notice how the Trinity teaches three separate persons representthe One God, just like the Book of Mormon teaches in Alma 11:44 2 Nephi 31:21and Mormon 7:7 and pre 1835 Joseph Smith Jr D&C 20:28

an example of confounding

John 10: Joseph Smithtranslation

23 All things are delivered to me ofmy Father; and no man knoweth that the Son is the Father, and the Father is theSon, but him to whom the Son will reveal it.

[Calm]

TheAthanasion Creed

I found the content of your post under two different names on two different sites. If this is not a cut and paste of your own work, you need to provide a reference or link to give credit to the actual author. If it is your own work, it would be wise to say "I wrote this elsewhere" to avoid claims of plagiarism.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

TheAthanasion Creed

Nowthis is the catholic faith:

1) Whosoever will be saved, before all things it isnecessary that he hold the catholic faith; (2) Which faith except every one dokeep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.(3) Andthe catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity inUnity; (4) Neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance. (5) Forthere is one Person of the Father, another of the Son and another of the HolySpirit. (6) But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spiritis all one, the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal

(33) Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, andinferior to the Father as touching His manhood.

Confounding means not mixing them up, The Father isn'tthe Son, the Son isn't the Father etc.

Substance is a synonym for Godhead the same as Essencebeing or God

Trinity

USED TO EXPRESS THE DOCTRINE OF THE UNITY OF GOD AS SUBSISTING INTHREE DISTINCT PERSONS. THIS WORD IS DERIVED FROM THE GR. trias, firstused by Theophilus (A.D. 168-183), or from the Lat. trinitas, first usedby Tertullian (A.D. 220), to express this doctrine.

The propositions involved in the doctrine are these: (1.) That Godis one, and that there is but one God (Deut. 6:4; 1 Kings 8:60; Isa. 44:6; Mark 12:29, 32; John 10:30). (2.)That the Father is a distinct divine Person (hypostasis, subsistentia,persona, suppositum intellectuale), distinct from the Son and the HolySpirit. (3.) That Jesus Christ was truly God, and yet was a Person distinctfrom the Father and the Holy Spirit. (4.) That the Holy Spirit is also adistinct divine Person.

Easton Bible Dictionary

Notice how the Trinity teaches three separate persons representthe One God, just like the Book of Mormon teaches in Alma 11:44 2 Nephi 31:21and Mormon 7:7 and pre 1835 Joseph Smith Jr D&C 20:28

an example of confounding

John 10: Joseph Smithtranslation

23 All things are delivered to me ofmy Father; and no man knoweth that the Son is the Father, and the Father is theSon, but him to whom the Son will reveal it.

Great, were in teh bible does it say they are one substance?

[cion]

I think LDS theology is pretty clear on what the godhead is. It is God, the Father, his son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost. All three of these guys are individuals, capable of acting independently. The first two have bodies with some sort of blood substitute and likely appear very bright when they reveal their bodies to you on earth. So bright, in fact, that it would hurt your eyes. The Holy Ghost is a spirit so he doesn't eat or burp or get a eye boogers when he rides a bike in dusty air. You pray to the God that is the Father and you close your prayer in the name of the God that is the son and the 3rd God (Holy Ghost) will infuse some sort of electrical pulse into your brain to cause a sense of euphoria as an answer to your prayer.

They all work together and never get sick of each other because they all have really easy-going personalities. The number one God - the Father, has at least one wife, who has never yet considered leaving her husband after 10,000 years or so. They get along marvelously as far as we know. Heavenly Father's wife is just as powerful as he is but she is a little less bristly on the edges. If you are looking for comfort, I highly recommend praying to her instead of the Father. For people that were molested by their father or step-father as a child, I highly recommend you consider praying to God the Mother. She will listen. She will answer. She doesn't need to go through all the chains of command, such as the Son and Holy Ghost. She is more direct.

[mfbukowski]

I think LDS theology is pretty clear on what the godhead is. It is God, the Father, his son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost. All three of these guys are individuals, capable of acting independently. The first two have bodies with some sort of blood substitute and likely appear very bright when they reveal their bodies to you on earth. So bright, in fact, that it would hurt your eyes. The Holy Ghost is a spirit so he doesn't eat or burp or get a eye boogers when he rides a bike in dusty air. You pray to the God that is the Father and you close your prayer in the name of the God that is the son and the 3rd God (Holy Ghost) will infuse some sort of electrical pulse into your brain to cause a sense of euphoria as an answer to your prayer.

They all work together and never get sick of each other because they all have really easy-going personalities. The number one God - the Father, has at least one wife, who has never yet considered leaving her husband after 10,000 years or so. They get along marvelously as far as we know. Heavenly Father's wife is just as powerful as he is but she is a little less bristly on the edges. If you are looking for comfort, I highly recommend praying to her instead of the Father. For people that were molested by their father or step-father as a child, I highly recommend you consider praying to God the Mother. She will listen. She will answer. She doesn't need to go through all the chains of command, such as the Son and Holy Ghost. She is more direct.

Just for the record, I don't feel like arguing about this because it will go no where, but this makes me very uncomfortable.

Our Father is infinitely above us and our silly motivations and projections- he is what we would call "transcendent" relative to us, and is infinitely perfect in every way.

I just couldn't let this go without saying that.

The Holy Ghost is the comforter, and there is a reason we don't pray to HM.

Very uncomfortable indeed. In fact, it borders on blasphemy, imo.

I guess you meant it to be cutsey, but it goes too far.

[thesometimesaint]

cion:

You can pray to whomever you like. But LDS doctrine is that we pray only to The Father.

[Ivan Komotios]

Great, were in teh bible does it say they are one substance?

I said Substance is a synounom for Godhead, I think you know where Godhead is found in the Bible

[Rob Bowman]

bluebell,

You wrote:

The KJV of the bible uses the term 'godhead' three times.

Colossians 2:9, Acts, 17:29, and Romans 1:20

I am familiar with those references. Not one of them speaks of the Godhead as a plurality of beings. In fact, Colossians 2:9 says that the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Christ bodily. How can the fullness of three Gods dwell bodily in one of those Gods?

You wrote:

The term 'trinity' doesn't appear at all in the KJV (i have no idea about other versions).

I agree. The CFR concerned the use of "Godhead" to refer to a plurality of Gods.

[Ivan Komotios]

Great, were in teh bible does it say they are one substance?

Substance is a synonym for Godhead the same as Essencebeing or God