Question For Evangelicals On The Trinity

[zerinus]

Evangelicals define the Trinity as three Persons in one God. The “three Persons” are identified as the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost. The question I have for the Evangelicals is this: Is the one God (that is composed of the “three Persons”) Himself/Itself a Person or not? Our resident Evangelical expert Rob Bowman has identified the one God with Jehovah of the Old Testament. So according to them Jehovah is the one God who is comprised of the Three Persons—Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. So here is the question then: Is Jehovah Himself a Person or not? If He is not, how do you explain the numerous scriptures that portray Him as a Person? If He is a Person, then you have got four “Persons” to deal with. Father, Son, Holy Ghost, and Jehovah. So you either have to define the Trinity as “three Persons in one Person,” or “three Gods in one God”. Why do you strenuously avoid that obvious definition and rigidly stick to “three Persons in one God?”

Edited August 3, 2011 by zerinus

[zerinus]

Evangelicals define the Trinity as three Persons in one God. The “three Persons” are identified as the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost. The question I have for the Evangelicals is this: Is the one God (that is composed of the “three Persons”) Himself/Itself a Person or not? Our resident Evangelical expert Rob Bowman has identified the one God with Jehovah of the Old Testament. So according to them Jehovah is the one God who is comprised of the Three Persons—Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. So here is the question then: Is Jehovah Himself a Person or not? If He is not, how do you explain the numerous scriptures that portray Him as a Person? If He is a Person, then you have got four “Persons” to deal with. Father, Son, Holy Ghost, and Jehovah. So you either have to define the Trinity as “three Persons in one Person,” or “three Gods in one God”. Why do you strenuously avoid that obvious definition and rigidly stick to “three Persons in one God?”

Bump for Rob Bowman.

[Rob Bowman]

zerinus,

You wrote:

Evangelicals define the Trinity as three Persons in one God. The “three Persons” are identified as the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost. The question I have for the Evangelicals is this: Is the one God (that is composed of the “three Persons”) Himself/Itself a Person or not? Our resident Evangelical expert Rob Bowman has identified the one God with Jehovah of the Old Testament. So according to them Jehovah is the one God who is comprised of the Three Persons—Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. So here is the question then: Is Jehovah Himself a Person or not? If He is not, how do you explain the numerous scriptures that portray Him as a Person? If He is a Person, then you have got four “Persons” to deal with. Father, Son, Holy Ghost, and Jehovah. So you either have to define the Trinity as “three Persons in one Person,” or “three Gods in one God”. Why do you strenuously avoid that obvious definition and rigidly stick to “three Persons in one God?”

Your approach to this subject simply won't work. Instead of addressing the massive biblical evidence I have presented for the doctrine of the Trinity (which you explicitly said you would not address), you want to try to defeat the doctrine by raising logical or linguistic objections to it.

It isn't only evangelicals that define the Trinity as three persons in one God. All orthodox Christians (Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant) do so. The term "person" in this context (Latin persona, Greek hypostasis in its later theological usage) is not identical in meaning to the term "being." Nor does it have the same meaning as in non-theological contexts in English when we use the word "person" commonly in reference to human beings. (This shouldn't be a problem, since most words have different meanings or nuances in different contexts.) The word "person," in Trinitarian theology, denotes a distinct center of relationality, which means that each person relates to, knows, speaks to, hears, and loves the other two. But they are not separate beings or discrete entities.

We might use the language differently, but the issue is what our wording means. For example, one might choose to say that in the usual non-theological sense of the term "person," it would be accurate to refer to the being of God as a "person," because the triune God clearly is a single, conscious being. If that is what you mean by "person," then God is one of those, not three. But this is not how Trinitarians use the word "person" in this context.

You can say that you find this doctrine confusing or contradictory if you like, but you can't refute the argument by claiming that we really believe in four persons. That is simply a misrepresentation based on an equivocation on the use of the term "person." The one being of God is not a "person" in the same sense that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each a "person." The "four person" objection can't get started without this equivocation.

By the way, the early LDS scriptures also speaks of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as "one God" (2 Ne. 31:21; Alma 11:44; see also the Testimony of Three Witnesses; D&C 20:28). Your theology requires you to redefine the expression "one God," but still, you're stuck with it: you affirm that they are three persons (or "personages") and yet "one God." Historically, the reason for these statements in early LDS scriptures is obvious: Joseph Smith started out more or less as a Trinitarian (if without much understanding of the doctrine).

[zerinus]

Your approach to this subject simply won't work. Instead of addressing the massive biblical evidence I have presented for the doctrine of the Trinity (which you explicitly said you would not address), you want to try to defeat the doctrine by raising logical or linguistic objections to it.

I did no such thing. You sent me to a large database, and I said I can't debate with a database. I asked you to bring the relevant points to the table in manageable bits so that they can be discussed.

It isn't only evangelicals that define the Trinity as three persons in one God. All orthodox Christians (Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant) do so. The term "person" in this context (Latin persona, Greek hypostasis in its later theological usage) is not identical in meaning to the term "being." Nor does it have the same meaning as in non-theological contexts in English when we use the word "person" commonly in reference to human beings. (This shouldn't be a problem, since most words have different meanings or nuances in different contexts.) The word "person," in Trinitarian theology, denotes a distinct center of relationality, which means that each person relates to, knows, speaks to, hears, and loves the other two. But they are not separate beings or discrete entities.

We might use the language differently, but the issue is what our wording means. For example, one might choose to say that in the usual non-theological sense of the term "person," it would be accurate to refer to the being of God as a "person," because the triune God clearly is a single, conscious being. If that is what you mean by "person," then God is one of those, not three. But this is not how Trinitarians use the word "person" in this context.

You can say that you find this doctrine confusing or contradictory if you like, but you can't refute the argument by claiming that we really believe in four persons. That is simply a misrepresentation based on an equivocation on the use of the term "person." The one being of God is not a "person" in the same sense that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each a "person." The "four person" objection can't get started without this equivocation.

I think you are being evasive, and engaging in obfuscation.

Is Jehovah a Person?

By the way, the early LDS scriptures also speaks of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as "one God" (2 Ne. 31:21; Alma 11:44; see also the Testimony of Three Witnesses; D&C 20:28). Your theology requires you to redefine the expression "one God," but still, you're stuck with it: you affirm that they are three persons (or "personages") and yet "one God." Historically, the reason for these statements in early LDS scriptures is obvious: Joseph Smith started out more or less as a Trinitarian (if without much understanding of the doctrine).

Those verses you are referring to simply teach the same doctrine that the Bible does. Jesus says in the Bible, "I and my Father are one" (John 10:30). And so does the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants. We don't question what the Bible teaches. We question how you understand or interpret them. Our doctrine is biblical. We don't dispute that. LDS modern scripture comes from the same source that the Bible does; so it is not surprising that they should all teach the same doctrines. It is how they are understood or interpreted that makes the difference.

[cdowis]

The LDS church accepts the teaching of Christ as found in John 17:19-21, where Christ said that his discuples would become one, perfect in one, with the Father, even as I (Christ) is one with the Father.

We reject the nonBiblical doctrine of "one substance", the doctrine of Emporer Constantine, who banished those who refused to vote for this creed.

That is the primary diffence between us. The creeds of man vs the teaching of Christ and the prophets.

[Rob Bowman]

zerinus,

You wrote:

I think you are being evasive, and engaging in obfuscation.

I'm sorry you feel this way. However, I answered your question as clearly and directly as I could.

Regarding the early Mormon scriptural references to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as "one God," you wrote:

Those verses you are referring to simply teach the same doctrine that the Bible does. Jesus says in the Bible, "I and my Father are one" (John 10:30). And so does the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants. We don't question what the Bible teaches. We question how you understand or interpret them. Our doctrine is biblical. We don't dispute that. LDS modern scripture comes from the same source that the Bible does; so it is not surprising that they should all teach the same doctrines. It is how they are understood or interpreted that makes the difference.

Now who is being evasive? Your comments do not address the fact that those LDS scriptures specifically call the three persons "one God," the very language you criticized Trinitarians for using.

[Rob Bowman]

Charles,

You wrote:

The LDS church accepts the teaching of Christ as found in John 17:19-21, where Christ said that his discuples would become one, perfect in one, with the Father, even as I (Christ) is one with the Father.

Pop quiz:

When, according to the LDS Church, are Christ's disciples supposed to become one in the sense meant in John 17:19-21?

(a) In this mortal life

(b) When they die

(c ) When they are raised from the dead

(d) When they attain exaltation in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom

(e) Other

Edited August 5, 2011 by Rob Bowman

[zerinus]

I'm sorry you feel this way. However, I answered your question as clearly and directly as I could.

Which doesn't answer anything at all.

Is Jehovah a Person?

Regarding the early Mormon scriptural references to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as "one God," you wrote:

Now who is being evasive? Your comments do not address the fact that those LDS scriptures specifically call the three persons "one God," the very language you criticized Trinitarians for using.

I don't criticize the language; I disagree with the interpretation.

Is Jehovah a Person?

[zerinus]

Pop quiz:

When, according to the LDS Church, are Christ's disciples supposed to become one in the sense meant in John 17:19-21?

(a) In this mortal life

(b) When they die

© When they are raised from the dead

(d) When they attain exaltation in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom

(e) Other

Achieving unity with the Father and the Son is a journey, not an event. It begins when we accept the gospel in this life, and strive daily to live in harmony with God's will; and ends when we obtain exaltation in the resurrection of the just.

[cdowis]

They can become "one" in this life thru repetence and keeping covenants, and "perfect in one" in the celestial kingdom as the covenants are fulfilled in perfections. This is the essence of exaltation.

[Rob Bowman]

zerinus,

You wrote:

Is Jehovah a Person?... Is Jehovah a Person?

I already answered this question when I wrote:

We might use the language differently, but the issue is what our wording means. For example, one might choose to say that in the usual non-theological sense of the term "person," it would be accurate to refer to the being of God as a "person," because the triune God clearly is a single, conscious being. If that is what you mean by "person," then God is one of those, not three. But this is not how Trinitarians use the word "person" in this context.

By "God" in the above paragraph, I mean the same being whose name is "Jehovah." So, there's your answer.

[Rob Bowman]

Charles,

You wrote:

They can become "one" in this life thru repetence and keeping covenants, and "perfect in one" in the celestial kingdom as the covenants are fulfilled in perfections. This is the essence of exaltation.

Let's look at the passage, shall we?

"20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. " (John 17:20-23 KJV, emphasis added)

Now, you seem to be saying that Christians can become "one" as stated in verses 21-22 in this mortal life, but we can become "perfect in one" as stated in verse 23 only in the celestial kingdom. Is that right?

[zerinus]

I already answered this question when I wrote:

By "God" in the above paragraph, I mean the same being whose name is "Jehovah." So, there's your answer.

Sorry Rob, but I find that utterly mystifying. You seem to be saying that Jehovah is bot a Person and not a Person. What on earth am I supposed to make out of that?

[Rob Bowman]

zerinus,

You wrote:

Sorry Rob, but I find that utterly mystifying. You seem to be saying that Jehovah is bot a Person and not a Person. What on earth am I supposed to make out of that?

No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that how one answers the question depends on how one defines terms.

Answer this: Are the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost one God? Yes or No?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Charles,

You wrote:

Let's look at the passage, shall we?

"20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. " (John 17:20-23 KJV, emphasis added)

Now, you seem to be saying that Christians can become "one" as stated in verses 21-22 in this mortal life, but we can become "perfect in one" as stated in verse 23 only in the celestial kingdom. Is that right?

In one sense this is correct. In another sense it is not. Rob, is there a scripture in the bible that claims we can be perfect here, today, right now?

I am curious your angle on this before I respond in more detail.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

zerinus,

You wrote:

No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that how one answers the question depends on how one defines terms.

Answer this: Are the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost one God? Yes or No?

Yes, but not in a metaphysical sense.

[zerinus]

Let's look at the passage, shall we?

"20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. " (John 17:20-23 KJV, emphasis added)

Now, you seem to be saying that Christians can become "one" as stated in verses 21-22 in this mortal life, but we can become "perfect in one" as stated in verse 23 only in the celestial kingdom. Is that right?

I am sure he can answer for himself; but allow me to pitch in as well. We receive a fulness as Jesus did:

Hebrews 5

:

8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;

9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

And in case you are interested, here is what modern scripture adds to that:

D&C 93

:

12 And I, John, saw that he received not of the fulness at the first, but received grace for grace;

13 And he received not of the fulness at first, but continued from grace to grace, until he received a fulness;

20 For if you keep my commandments you shall receive of his fulness, and be glorified in me as I am in the Father; therefore, I say unto you, you shall receive grace for grace.

Jesus is our prototype. He has set us the example. We follow in His footsteps, and achieve a fulness as He did—not all at once, but a little bit at a time, until we arrive at the final destination. Got the idea now? Good stuff, isn't it!

[zerinus]

No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that how one answers the question depends on how one defines terms.

Answer this: Are the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost one God? Yes or No?

Answer, Yes.

Now please answer the question:

Is Jehovah a Person? Yes or No?

[Vance]

Charles said,

They can become "one" in this life thru repetence and keeping covenants, and "perfect in one" in the celestial kingdom as the covenants are fulfilled in perfections. This is the essence of exaltation.

Now how do you go from that to this?

Now, you seem to be saying that Christians can become "one" as stated in verses 21-22 in this mortal life, but we can become "perfect in one" as stated in verse 23 only in the celestial kingdom. Is that right?

Where does the "only" come from?

[Rob Bowman]

Mola,

You wrote:

In one sense this is correct. In another sense it is not.

Charles made the statement, and I am seeking confirmation that I have understood him correctly. Would you like to explain in what sense it is correct and in what sense it is not?

You asked:

Rob, is there a scripture in the bible that claims we can be perfect here, today, right now?

I am curious your angle on this before I respond in more detail.

You first. In John 17:23, Jesus prayed that his disciples might be "perfect in one." Was he talking about in this mortal life, or not? That, to put it more simply, is what I asked Charles. This text is one that he and other Mormons constantly cite as a proof text for your doctrinal claims. I am asking Charles, or you, or any other Mormon here, to explain the verse to me as you understand it. Thus, it is appropriate for me to ask you to answer your own question before I comment on the verse.

[cdowis]

Becoming one is a journey, not a single event. The journey starts in mortality (ignore the issue of vicarious/temple work for now). We make covenants with the Father at baptism, receive the Holy Ghost, and renew that covenant with the sacrament. And then the temple covenants. We try to live the conditions of those covenants by keeping the commandments and repentance.

We make the covenants, and make a beswt effort to keep those covenants. We are sanctified and justified by a combination of keeping the commandments, repentence, and thru the atonement and grace of Christ. We can be forgiven of our sins -- they are washed away by the blood of Christ.

Anyway, that journey of "be ye therefore perfect as the Father and I are perfect" continues on to the next life. The Lord then fulfills His side of the covenant when we can become joint heirs with the Son. and inherit, with the Son, all that the Father has.

This is ties together the concept of covenants, repentence, keeping the covenants (commandments), mercy, grace, the atonement, and the consummation of those covenants -- joint heirs with the Son, perfect in one in His kingdom.

Edited August 5, 2011 by cdowis

[Rob Bowman]

zerinus,

Okay, if you agree that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are "one God," then why do you criticize Trinitarians for saying the same thing?

You wrote:

Now please answer the question:

Is Jehovah a Person? Yes or No?

I've answered this twice, and you're simply ignoring my answer. I'll answer it in other words again: As I use the term Person, the answer is No.

[Rob Bowman]

Charles,

You wrote:

Becoming one is a journey, not a single event. The journey starts in mortality (ignore the issue of vicarious/temple work for now). We make covenants with the Father at baptism, receive the Holy Ghost, and renew that covenant with the sacrament. And then the temple covenants. We try to live the conditions of those covenants by keeping the commandments and repentance.

We make the covenants, and make a beswt effort to keep those covenants. We are sanctified and justified by a combination of keeping the commandments, repentence, and thru the atonement and grace of Christ. We can be forgiven of our sins -- they are washed away by the blood of Christ.

Anyway, that journey of "be ye therefore perfect as the Father and I are perfect" continues on to the next life. We then can become joint heirs with the Son. and inherit, with the Son, all that the Father has.

So, your answer is that in this mortality we begin the journey toward the destination of becoming "one" or "perfect," but we do not arrive at that destination until the next life. Therefore, we do not actually become "one," or at least "perfect in one," in this mortal life. Right?

[zerinus]

Okay, if you agree that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are "one God," then why do you criticize Trinitarians for saying the same thing?

I don't. I object to the philosophical slant they put on it.

I've answered this twice, and you're simply ignoring my answer.

I didn't know that you did.

I'll answer it in other words again: As I use the term Person, the answer is No.

Well, I never knew that the word "person" needed to be redefined. Do you accept the dictionary definition of "person"? If not, why not?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Mola,

You wrote:

Charles made the statement, and I am seeking confirmation that I have understood him correctly. Would you like to explain in what sense it is correct and in what sense it is not?

You asked:

You first. In John 17:23, Jesus prayed that his disciples might be "perfect in one." Was he talking about in this mortal life, or not? That, to put it more simply, is what I asked Charles. This text is one that he and other Mormons constantly cite as a proof text for your doctrinal claims. I am asking Charles, or you, or any other Mormon here, to explain the verse to me as you understand it. Thus, it is appropriate for me to ask you to answer your own question before I comment on the verse.

OK, I will play. I think in one sense we are not absolutely perfect until after this life. However in LDS theology, when we take the sacrament we renew our covenants and thus are washed again. Thus one could argue that we are perfect or iow perfect or with out sin. I echo what others have said that perfection is journey not really a one time event. I will also add that being one is having the same mind as God or the same goal as God has for us. There is more to being one than just being perfect.

Now that I have explained that, I am curious to your perspective.

I have to admit that I am tired of the more aspects of debating. I generally don't do it anymore. What I am after is perspective. Don't think I am trying to play gotcha, because that is not what I want.

Edited August 5, 2011 by Mola Ram Suda Ram