Mormonism'S Anthropomorphic God: Why Is This A Problem For Other Theists?

[georged]

They most certainly do. They believe that this substance connects them all in one. Of course, it makes no sense whatsoever. I was christened Catholic and am a convert to the church, and in the priests lectures.and even in their songs; "It's three gods in one god, blessed Trinity"! My point being, if they are so closely connected a s one, why would part of one know when part of the substance would return, but the other part would not know?!?

[altersteve]

I agree, it doesn't make any sense. But I'll need to issue a CFR for your claim that believers in the Trinity "most certainly do" believe that Christ was praying to Himself or that the Father and the Son are "the same person." Every Trinitarian I have spoken to has denied this.

Let them speak for their beliefs, and let us try to represent their beliefs fairly.

[georged]

Yea, I was one of them before, and many like me believed that. I heard a Catholic priest give a lecture stating that when Jesus said that if you have seen Him, then you have seen the Father, and that He meant it literally since they were one and the same (substance or whatever). This is the reason I rejected the church.

[altersteve]

I'm just saying, I've never heard a Trinitarian express the belief that Christ was praying to Himself, and I've seen many deny that (see here, here, and

for examples).

So, again, CFR (that means "call for references") that Trinitarians believe Jesus was praying to Himself.

[georged]

There is no sense in keeping on beating a dead horse. As I told you before, I was ONE OF THEM, and furthermore, even if you have not heard them state that they were not the same person, or all of the same substance, I have! Anyhow, my main point was that it is extremely stupid, and makes no sense!

[maklelan]

There is no sense in keeping on beating a dead horse. As I told you before, I was ONE OF THEM, and furthermore, even if you have not heard them state that they were not the same person, or all of the same substance, I have! Anyhow, my main point was that it is extremely stupid, and makes no sense!

The Catholic doctrine is that they are three different persons who share the same being. This is a philosophical way to consolidate three principles: monotheism, equality of each member of the godhead, and distinctness of each member of the godhead. It is perfectly reasonable if one is willing to distinguish the person from the being, which is close to what Latter-day Saints do in asserting that "God" in the Book of Mormon often refers to the collective "Godhead." In my opinion, mischaracterizing the Trinity or calling it "extremely stupid" is little different from ex-Mormons doing the same vis-à-vis LDS ideologies. I don't think it makes a contribution to the discussion.

[thesometimesaint]

I'll let the various churches define for themselves what they believe. What I don't understand is how Jesus the Christ can not know something that God the Father knows and still be the same being.

[altersteve]

The Catholic doctrine is that they are three different persons who share the same being. This is a philosophical way to consolidate three principles: monotheism, equality of each member of the godhead, and distinctness of each member of the godhead. It is perfectly reasonable if one is willing to distinguish the person from the being, which is close to what Latter-day Saints do in asserting that "God" in the Book of Mormon often refers to the collective "Godhead." In my opinion, mischaracterizing the Trinity or calling it "extremely stupid" is little different from ex-Mormons doing the same vis-à-vis LDS ideologies. I don't think it makes a contribution to the discussion.

Agreed 100%. I have always argued that the traditional Christian Trinity and the LDS Godhead are indeed different, but mostly because of the different terminology and definitions we use. Yet the ideas themselves not as contradictory as people think. We just have to make an effort to understand one another; and often times both parties are guilty of not doing this.

As thesometimesaint said above, let them define what their doctrine is. If we insist that they represent our beliefs accurately, then it's only fair that we strive to do the same with their beliefs. Let us find truth in other religions or some kind of common ground, rather than emphasizing our differences. I believe the Lord expects this kind of attitude from His Saints, and from Christians in general.

Edited March 19, 2012 by altersteve

[ChristKnight]

As a former Catholic, I too agree with maklelan and altersteve

[cdowis]

LDS reject the doctrine of "one substance" -- that the homousia of the Nicene Creed is the doctrine of man.

We believe that we were created in the very image of God, and that we can become one with the Father in the same way that Christ is one with Him. Christ said it, and we believe it.

[Rob Bowman]

Charles,

You wrote:

We believe that we were created in the very image of God, and that we can become one with the Father in the same way that Christ is one with Him. Christ said it, and we believe it.

If you understand Christ's statement to mean that you can become one with the Father in every sense in which Christ is, then you must believe that you can become part of the Godhead. Do you?

[Vance]

Charles,

You wrote:

If you understand Christ's statement to mean that you can become one with the Father in every sense in which Christ is, then you must believe that you can become part of the Godhead. Do you?

False premise.

The Godhead is defined as God, the Eternal Father, His Son, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost.

Becoming one with the Father "in every sense" doesn't change the definition of the Godhead and therefore doesn't require one to believe that they will become part of the Godhead.

[cdowis]

If you understand Christ's statement to mean that you can become one with the Father in every sense in which Christ is, then you must believe that you can become part of the Godhead. Do you?

I am quoting what Christ said, so you need to discuss that question with Him. We reject the teaching of homoousia, and accept the teaching of Christ.

The modern churches have replaced the prophets with theologians and Bible scholars such as yourself. I am very grateful to the Lord that he has sent us living prophets.

Edited March 19, 2012 by cdowis

[cdowis]

False premise.

The Godhead is defined as God, the Eternal Father, His Son, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost.

Becoming one with the Father "in every sense" doesn't change the definition of the Godhead and therefore doesn't require one to believe that they will become part of the Godhead.

Vance,

You do understand that Rob, like Saul, has attended divinity school, taught by the best and brightest theologians. He has decades of experience in debate (witnessing to the cultists), and was hired to outsmart people such as yourself.

And you are going to play the game by his rules?

The false premise is that I am responsible to offer him an explanation for something that Christ declared. That is something between him and the Lord.

Edited March 19, 2012 by cdowis

[Vance]

Vance,

You do understand that Rob, like Saul, has attended divinity school, taught by the best and brightest theologians.

That may be, but it didn't take.

He has decades of experience in debate (witnessing to the cultists), and was hired to outsmart people such as yourself.

That may be true, but it isn't working.

And you are going to play the game by his rules?

No. He can't even play the game by his rules. He has to use double standards all the time.

The false premise is that I am responsible to offer him an explanation for something that Christ declared. That is something between him and the Lord.

Yes, that is another false premise on his part.

[cdowis]

I repeat, he is playing the game by his rules. And it always works.

(When you say "It's not working", who is keeping score? who's the judge on what is working) You can never beat the rule maker and the score keeper, when you play by their rules.

Edited March 19, 2012 by cdowis

[Nemesis]

Let's knock of the personal attacks please.

Nemesis

[mfbukowski]

There is no sense in keeping on beating a dead horse. As I told you before, I was ONE OF THEM, and furthermore, even if you have not heard them state that they were not the same person, or all of the same substance, I have! Anyhow, my main point was that it is extremely stupid, and makes no sense!

Without quoting who you are responding to, it is difficult to know...... well, who you are responding to.

[mfbukowski]

Agreed 100%. I have always argued that the traditional Christian Trinity and the LDS Godhead are indeed different, but mostly because of the different terminology and definitions we use. Yet the ideas themselves not as contradictory as people think. We just have to make an effort to understand one another; and often times both parties are guilty of not doing this.

As thesometimesaint said above, let them define what their doctrine is. If we insist that they represent our beliefs accurately, then it's only fair that we strive to do the same with their beliefs. Let us find truth in other religions or some kind of common ground, rather than emphasizing our differences. I believe the Lord expects this kind of attitude from His Saints, and from Christians in general.

For what it's worth, I also agree. Perhaps I sound like I am attacking Catholics but I would never want to do that. All of my extended family is Catholic and I certainly do not want to attack them or their beliefs.

My aim is simply to attack the philosophy on which their DESCRIPTION of how three persons can be one Godhead or Trinity is based.

In short I would argue that their descriptions of how to accomplish their goal of showing that one God can be three persons are no longer philosophically viable. I of course heartily agree however that the God head is indeed comprised of three persons.

[mfbukowski]

If you understand Christ's statement to mean that you can become one with the Father in every sense in which Christ is, then you must believe that you can become part of the Godhead. Do you?

John 17, underlining added:

²⁰ “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, ²¹ that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. ²² I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— ²³ I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

So I guess this means you DON'T believe what it says?

[mfbukowski]

You do understand that Rob, like Saul, has attended divinity school, taught by the best and brightest theologians. He has decades of experience in debate (witnessing to the cultists), and was hired to outsmart people such as yourself.

Yes, that's true. But unfortunately his arguments are not very good. I am waiting to hear his interpretation of John 17.

But I will wager he won't respond. He doesn't like me.

Edited March 19, 2012 by mfbukowski

[georged]

I was responding to Altersteve. THe Athenasian Creed adopted at the council of NIcene was so named because it was a man made document formulated during the time of Athenasia. However, nobody knows who actually formulated it, but it definately fulfills the prophesy of Paul that in the latter times "they will not endure sound {or logical} doctrine"! It probably came from a gross misunderstanding of Christ's meaning when He stated that He and His Father were one. However, one should remember that He also prayed to the Father that His apostles may all be one just as He and His Heavenly Father were one, but that doesn't make it fifteen in one with all the same substance! The scriptures state that surely the Lord will do nothing except He first reveal it to His servants the prophets (see Amos 3:7), so when it came time for the "restitution of all things," the Lord revealed to HIs prophet exactly how it should be done. The Lord also revealed many truths to this prophet, including the nature of the Godhead! We should all give heed to what the true prophets have taught and seen, such as Joseph Smith and Stephen, and not give heed to some ridiculous man made doctrine whom no one even knows who came up with the idea, or to a church sho suppoted the inquisition, the sale of indulgences, and persecuted a man just for teaching that the earth was not the center of the universe! How could any of these latter be regarded as inspired, especially in view of the fact that it is a totally irrational doctrine anyway! If anyone has not read the Athenasian creed, I challenge them to do so and judge for themselves how absurd it is!!!

[mfbukowski]

I was responding to Altersteve. THe Athenasian Creed adopted at the council of NIcene was so named because it was a man made document formulated during the time of Athenasia. However, nobody knows who actually formulated it, but it definately fulfills the prophesy of Paul that in the latter times "they will not endure sound {or logical} doctrine"! It probably came from a gross misunderstanding of Christ's meaning when He stated that He and His Father were one. However, one should remember that He also prayed to the Father that His apostles may all be one just as He and His Heavenly Father were one, but that doesn't make it fifteen in one with all the same substance! The scriptures state that surely the Lord will do nothing except He first reveal it to His servants the prophets (see Amos 3:7), so when it came time for the "restitution of all things," the Lord revealed to HIs prophet exactly how it should be done. The Lord also revealed many truths to this prophet, including the nature of the Godhead! We should all give heed to what the true prophets have taught and seen, such as Joseph Smith and Stephen, and not give heed to some ridiculous man made doctrine whom no one even knows who came up with the idea, or to a church sho suppoted the inquisition, the sale of indulgences, and persecuted a man just for teaching that the earth was not the center of the universe! How could any of these latter be regarded as inspired, especially in view of the fact that it is a totally irrational doctrine anyway! If anyone has not read the Athenasian creed, I challenge them to do so and judge for themselves how absurd it is!!!

Who are you responding to?

[georged]

I was responding to Altersteve.

[volgadon]

and persecuted a man just for teaching that the earth was not the center of the universe!

No, not just for.