bluebell Posted April 27, 2015 Author Posted April 27, 2015 Depends on what "eternity" means. I consider an eternity to be a measure of dominion and authority, and that a plurality of these eternities exist. In that sense, I believe that Jesus has always been the Son of God in this eternity.That's a really cool way of looking at it!
JLHPROF Posted April 27, 2015 Posted April 27, 2015 Depends on what "eternity" means. I consider an eternity to be a measure of dominion and authority, and that a plurality of these eternities exist. In that sense, I believe that Jesus has always been the Son of God in this eternity. I agree with this. I believe an eternity is the length of a creation period. That's how God existed before the beginning. But prior to this creation his existence was part of another creation period before he was God.
mfbukowski Posted April 27, 2015 Posted April 27, 2015 (edited) That's a really cool way of looking at it!And very scriptural. "Per omnia saecula seculorum" in the latin vulgate literally means "Through all the worlds of the worlds", and has been translated "from eternity to eternity."http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_saecula_saeculorumWe also hear "worlds without end" which means the same thing.https://www.lds.org/ensign/2013/08/worlds-without-number?lang=eng Edited April 27, 2015 by mfbukowski 2
halconero Posted April 27, 2015 Posted April 27, 2015 And very scriptural. "Per omnia saecula seculorum" in the latin vulgate literally means "Through all the worlds of the worlds", and has been translated "from eternity to eternity."http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_saecula_saeculorumWe also hear "worlds without end" which means the same thing.https://www.lds.org/ensign/2013/08/worlds-without-number?lang=engYeah, interestingly enough, many of the scriptures refer to those who are exalted as existing from eternity to eternity, or everlasting to everlasting. The division becomes especially apparent in sections 132 and 76 of the Doctrine and Covenants. 3
coolrok7 Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 (coolrok7) . . .As Paloma made the point in which she had stated, the Bible is both descriptive as well as prescriptive. I believe that God has intended the Bible to inform what He requires us to know regarding the matter of faith and how it leads to the promised eternal life post this mortal life, on into eternity. I appeal to Biblical teaching not to be offensive but which will be to believing Mormons, here and elsewhere. (post #189) (Bluebell) It's not offensive at all when you quote scripture to support your beliefs. Mormons don't disagree with the Bible; we disagree with your interpretation of it. That's an important distinction. post #191 People in general agree or disagree, depending on the topic/source of the information being discussed. In light of the opening of this thread you started, you had stated: I know that for many non-LDS Christians the idea that Jesus was created by God-is God's spirit Son-is offensive. This would seem to imply that Jesus is only considered the Son of God because of the mortal birth as such. post#1 It's not necessarily offensive to me but it is to the truth of God as revealed in Jesus Christ. Jesus had no beginning as part of the Godhead (Psalm 90:2; John 1:1-3, 18; Colossians 1:16-18) but His physical form did in the womb of the Virgin Mary as recorded in Luke 1. The primary distinction to be made here Bluebell is what Biblical Scripture actually teaches in totality/context about the topic under discussion. Scripture interprets Scripture which is exegesis not eisegesis. Mormons ultimately disagree with major Biblical teaching, especially with this topic which goes to the why of your following statement. In your response (post #182) to Paloma (post #181), you had stated: I admit that because of my theology some of what you have expressed makes less sense to me. . . This I believe stems directly from Joseph Smith by what he ended up teaching (his interpretation) in disagreement with certain Biblical teaching. A Heavenly Father/Mother God having spiritual children (Exaltation to Godhood/eternal progression) being the source of the disagreement with Biblical teaching on the matter.
TheSkepticChristian Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 Ultimately our theological differences lead us in different directions. In my view, God is not human, nor even close to being human, and never was human. You believe God was a human "the word became flesh" You did not specify
TheSkepticChristian Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 (edited) It's not necessarily offensive to me but it is to the truth of God as revealed in Jesus Christ. Jesus had no beginning as part of the Godhead (Psalm 90:2; John 1:1-3, 18; Colossians 1:16-18) but His physical form did in the womb of the Virgin Mary as recorded in Luke 1. How can three persons be one? Logic and Math say that three is three. Mormons ultimately disagree with major Biblical teaching, especially with this topic which goes to the why of your following statement. In your response (post #182) to Paloma (post #181), you had stated: Where does the Bible teach "three persons, one substance"? and how is that possible?Do you believe the Bible is infallible? Scripture interprets Scripture which is exegesis not eisegesis. Where is sola scritura in the Bible? How do you define the word "scripture"? What is the evidence for 66 books only? "Scripture interprets Scripture" What does that even mean? CFR Edited May 13, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian
danielwoods Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 You believe God was a human "the word became flesh" You did not specify Jesus as the Word put on flesh which gave him two natures. Fully man and fully God. My statement that God isn't human and never was, is to juxtapose the teaching derived from the Bible with that derived from LDS sources. In the case of Jesus he put on humanity as a way to communicate and save, not that he needed humanity to live. He is was and always will be the I AM.
TheSkepticChristian Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 Jesus as the Word put on flesh which gave him two natures. Fully man and fully God. My statement that God isn't human and never was Contradiction. If the Trinity is true, logic is meaningless. How can a being be three persons? How is that possible? 3 = 3, not 1. How can a being live outside space and time?
danielwoods Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 (edited) Contradiction. If the Trinity is true, logic is meaningless. How can a being be three persons? How is that possible? 3 = 3, not 1. How can a being live outside space and time? Human logic is limited to this world and our human limits of understanding. How can one being be three persons? The question can't be addressed adequately in human terms alone, yet that's all we have so we use them. We understand things that we've never experienced, by referencing things that we have experienced. Stars are hotter than we can even imagine, so we compare their temperature using scales we understand. Some stars are larger than we can even conceive, so we compare them to our solar system to get an idea of their size. How can one being be three persons? Honestly, there are many things that we don't know how it all works, and this is certainly one of them. Even the LDS have mysteries that aren't explained. How can a being live outside of time? If we were all fish, and we all lived in water all of our lives. Our question would be, how can a being live outside of water? Our perception limits our imagination about what is possible. CS Lewis described God as a being that exists in every moment, at the same time. "Before abraham was, I AM" Said Jesus. How is this possible? Well, that too is an interesting question, and using only human logic, I don't think we'll be able to grasp it. Edited May 13, 2015 by danielwoods
Gray Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 How can three persons be one? Logic and Math say that three is three. One of my mission house mates and I came to the conclusion, after reading the Book of Mormon, that the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost are one God in the sense that God is a made up of three persons. That is to say, God is not an individual person, just as, for example, a board of directors is not an individual person. God is more like a committee of three individuals. As I understand it this view isn't far off from the trinity.
TheSkepticChristian Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 (edited) How can one being be three persons? Honestly, there are many things that we don't know how it all works, and this is certainly one of them. Even the LDS have mysteries that aren't explained. I agree, there are a lot of mysteries and stuff that we do not understand, there is a huge list of unsolved problems in physics. However, the Trinity is against Mathematical proof. I like what apologist Daniel Peterson said, "We don’t expect coercive proof of the kind found in mathematics (and virtually only in mathematics)." It is a Mathematical proof that 1 + 1 + 1 = 3, or 3 = 3, not 1. Our observations of the natural world is one thing, but our observations of pure Mathematics is a totally different level. Edited May 13, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian
danielwoods Posted May 14, 2015 Posted May 14, 2015 I agree, there are a lot of mysteries and stuff that we do not understand, there is a huge list of unsolved problems in physics. However, the Trinity is against Mathematical proof. I like what apologist Daniel Peterson said, "We don’t expect coercive proof of the kind found in mathematics (and virtually only in mathematics)." It is a Mathematical proof that 1 + 1 + 1 = 3, or 3 = 3, not 1. Our observations of the natural world is one thing, but our observations of pure Mathematics is a totally different level. Luckily the Trinity isn't against the reality that is described in the Bible, as God. Further, math can only describe things so far. There's no mathematical definition for love and human relationships, yet that is the purpose God created us for. So, math with it's ability to describe many things has no explanatory power explaining some things.
TheSkepticChristian Posted May 14, 2015 Posted May 14, 2015 (edited) There's no mathematical definition for love and human relationships True, Math cannot describe love, but Math tells us that three persons is three, not one. Luckily the Trinity isn't against the reality that is described in the Bible, Where does the Bible say that three persons is one being? and Edited May 14, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian
danielwoods Posted May 14, 2015 Posted May 14, 2015 (edited) True, Math cannot describe love, but Math tells us that three persons is three, not one. Where does the Bible say that three persons is one being? and Math doesn't tell us anything about three persons and the nature of the only God that exists. The Bible describes God as three and one. If you are interested, there are many resources and over a thousand years of debate on the subject. The position of the LDS isn't supported by traditional Christian sources. Edited May 14, 2015 by danielwoods
Storm Rider Posted May 14, 2015 Posted May 14, 2015 Math doesn't tell us anything about three persons and the nature of the only God that exists. The Bible describes God as three and one. If you are interested, there are many resources and over a thousand years of debate on the subject. The position of the LDS isn't supported by traditional Christian sources. Maybe everything but the NT and OT. If you are one who believes that the Trinitarian doctrine began with the Bible rather than in the Patristic period, then you are only one side of a scholarly discussion between Trinitarians themselves and Nontrinitarians. There is honest scholarly debate about when this doctrine first game to be; it is not settled. Regardless, the doctrines taught by the Church of Jesus Christ are based both on scripture and revelation or modern day scripture. I find just as much support for my beliefs in the OT and NT as I do anything else. The differences we share based upon interpretation of those primary sources.
danielwoods Posted May 14, 2015 Posted May 14, 2015 Maybe everything but the NT and OT. If you are one who believes that the Trinitarian doctrine began with the Bible rather than in the Patristic period, then you are only one side of a scholarly discussion between Trinitarians themselves and Nontrinitarians. There is honest scholarly debate about when this doctrine first game to be; it is not settled. Regardless, the doctrines taught by the Church of Jesus Christ are based both on scripture and revelation or modern day scripture. I find just as much support for my beliefs in the OT and NT as I do anything else. The differences we share based upon interpretation of those primary sources. I would say it differently. The LDS doctrines are based on modern day revelation (which includes their scriptures), and the OT and NT are viewed in light of that modern revelation. Which is exactly what NT believers do with the OT. So, the differences, while based on interpretation, yes, but that interpretation is derived from a trust of the accuracy of modern day revelation that only the LDS trust.
Jeanne Posted May 14, 2015 Posted May 14, 2015 I have always been taught or under stood that Jesus was the Eldest or first born of the spirit..that he was destined before "the foundation of the world".
TheSkepticChristian Posted May 14, 2015 Posted May 14, 2015 (edited) Math doesn't tell us anything about three persons and the nature of the only God that exists. The Bible describes God as three and one. If Math does not tell you anything about the number of persons, then where did you get "three persons" from? The Bible never mentions "three persons" Math cannot describe love, power, and many things, but it tells us that three persons is three, not one. Edited May 14, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian 1
Gray Posted May 14, 2015 Posted May 14, 2015 If Math does not tell you anything about the number of persons, then where did you get "three persons" from? The Bible never mentions "three persons" Math cannot describe love, power, and many things, but it tells us that three persons is three, not one. As I understand it, the trinity doctrine does not state that the three persons are one person. Only that they are one God.
TheSkepticChristian Posted May 14, 2015 Posted May 14, 2015 As I understand it, the trinity doctrine does not state that the three persons are one person. Only that they are one God. I didn't say one person, but here is a video that explains the problem
danielwoods Posted May 14, 2015 Posted May 14, 2015 If Math does not tell you anything about the number of persons, then where did you get "three persons" from? The Bible never mentions "three persons" Math cannot describe love, power, and many things, but it tells us that three persons is three, not one. As I said, if you want to find some sources on this, they are numerous, and yes the Bible talks about all three persons of the Godhead. And to respond to your statement, no one is claiming that three persons are one person.
TheSkepticChristian Posted May 14, 2015 Posted May 14, 2015 As I said, if you want to find some sources on this, they are numerous, and yes the Bible talks about all three persons of the Godhead. And to respond to your statement, no one is claiming that three persons are one person. I didn't say "one person" you believe in three persons, one being which is the same thing. How can three be one? I agree, there are a lot of mysteries and stuff that we do not understand, there is a huge list of unsolved problems in physics. However, the Trinity is against Mathematical proof. I like what apologist Daniel Peterson said, "We don’t expect coercive proof of the kind found in mathematics (and virtually only in mathematics)." It is a Mathematical proof that 1 + 1 + 1 = 3, or 3 = 3, not 1. Our observations of the natural world is one thing, but our observations of pure Mathematics is a totally different level. As I said, if you want to find some sources on this, they are numerous, and yes the Bible talks about all three persons of the Godhead. cfr 1
danielwoods Posted May 14, 2015 Posted May 14, 2015 I didn't say "one person" you believe in three persons, one being which is the same thing. How can three be one? If you think that persons and beings are the same thing, then that's your belief, not mine, or those of traditional Christianity through the ages. cfr I don't claim to be a resource, so copied below are some links that took me two seconds to find using google. You can see the the Bible speaks about each person of God as God, and yet it's only one God. http://www.spotlightministries.org.uk/bowmanonthetrinity.htm http://www.evidenceunseen.com/theology/christian-doctrine/defending-the-doctrine-of-the-trinity/ http://crossexamined.org/the-trinity-defended/
thesometimesaint Posted May 14, 2015 Posted May 14, 2015 The Trinity is nowhere found in the Bible, the Godhead is. Three individual Gods that act as one.
Recommended Posts