mfbukowski Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Thanks for the biblical verses, MFB. But I was wondering about the Godhead. Are the Father, Son and Holy Ghost in it, or is it in them?Are you in a family, or is a family in you? Why do you make words complicated? 1
Sp0ckrates Posted June 18, 2015 Author Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) Simple answer: Yes. There are 3 divine beings that make up the Godhead.This from one of the 12 Apostles of our Church:https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2007/10/the-only-true-god-and-jesus-christ-whom-he-hath-sent?lang=eng&query=godheadOur first and foremost article of faith in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is “We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.”2 We believe these three divine persons constituting a single Godhead are united in purpose, in manner, in testimony, in mission. We believe Them to be filled with the same godly sense of mercy and love, justice and grace, patience, forgiveness, and redemption. I think it is accurate to say we believe They are one in every significant and eternal aspect imaginable except believing Them to be three persons combined in one substance, a Trinitarian notion never set forth in the scriptures because it is not true.Hey, Fly. Thanks for answering the question and letting me know there are three gods in one Godhead. So here is my confusion: Instead of saying Christ is in the Godhead, isn't Paul saying the Godhead is in Christ? For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.(Colossians 2:9) Edited June 18, 2015 by Sp0ckrates
Sp0ckrates Posted June 18, 2015 Author Posted June 18, 2015 Have you read the GospelPrinciples manual? Online and quick read. Covers basics well IMO.For a larger variety, the Encyclopedia of Mormonism is online as well.It can help to read to fill in large structure first, than nuances by asking.Pardon me if you've read it already, but the Godhead question led me to believ you hadn't, so I thought I mention it.Thanks Calmoriah. What does it say about the Godhead?
Sp0ckrates Posted June 18, 2015 Author Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) Are you in a family, or is a family in you?I guess my best answer would have to be this: I am in my family. My family is my wife and son. My family is not in me. For it is impossible for my wife and son to be in me. Edited June 18, 2015 by Sp0ckrates
Flyonthewall Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Hey, Fly. Thanks for answering the question and letting me know there are three gods in one Godhead. So here is my confusion: Instead of saying Christ is in the Godhead, isn't Paul saying the Godhead is in Christ? For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. (Colossians 2:9)To me, this would go towards what it means to be "in" someone. Jesus stated this in John 10: 38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him. It is a matter of unity. So Paul is saying that Jesus is in unity/harmony with the Godhead and the Godhead is in unity/harmony with Him.
bluebell Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Wow! I could not agree more. But you might be surprised to find how difficult it is to get most Catholics or Protestants to admit the Bible is ever ambiguous! I'm not sure why Catholics would be that way, since they are not a bible only religion. But protestants really have backed themselves into a corner when it comes to the Bible and doctrine. When you claim something like sola scriptura you have to be willing to die on the sword of Bible unambiguity. But, just get a Lutheran and an Evangelical in the same room and ask them both whether or not baptism is necessary for salvation and see the sparks fly! (No disrespect to either religion intended). So what about Acts and Colossians? Do you think either of those passages are defining Godhead correctly? I honestly can't tell. I don't think we have enough information with just those verses alone to figure out exactly what they meant when they used that word (or whatever word they used that was translated into that word, i guess).
JAHS Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Thanks, JAHS. So since God may refer to a group, is it fair to say the Godhead is the group the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are in? Yes.
Storm Rider Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Hey, Fly. Thanks for answering the question and letting me know there are three gods in one Godhead. So here is my confusion: Instead of saying Christ is in the Godhead, isn't Paul saying the Godhead is in Christ? For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.(Colossians 2:9) I understand the context of the above to be that Jesus has the fullness of godhood, divinity, in him. The same can be said of the Father and the Holy Ghost. At the same time Jesus is a member of the Godhead - Jesus and the Father are not the same individual, God. They are separate and distinct. Jesus prays to the Father, begs him to allow the cup to pass from him, but it was Jesus' acceptance of the Father's will that sealed Jesus' choice to proceed with the crucifixion. I think it is important to take scripture in context with all other scripture. My understanding of the Godhead is based strictly on scripture. I understand how some can conclude differently, but only if they take scriptures out of context by focusing on a few while ignoring the rest. We use the term Godhead because it is in scripture.
Nofear Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 This isn't a question for our fellow ''traditional'' Christians but for us LDS. How do you personally classify Heavenly Mother with our god language?
mfbukowski Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Thanks Calmoriah. What does it say about the Godhead?I think the suggestion is that you actually read it for yourself. 2
Calm Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Three glorified, exalted, and perfected personages comprise the Godhead or supreme presidency of the universe. … They are: God the Father; God the Son; God the Holy Ghost. …“Though each God in the Godhead is a personage, separate and distinct from each of the others, yet they are ‘one God’ … , meaning that they are united as one in the attributes of perfection. For instance, each has the fulness of truth, knowledge, charity, power, justice, judgment, mercy, and faith. Accordingly they all think, act, speak, and are alike in all things; and yet they are three separate and distinct entities. Each occupies space and is and can be in but one place at one time, but each has power and influence that is everywhere present” https://www.lds.org/manual/print/doctrines-of-the-gospel-student-manual/chapter-3-god-the-eternal-father?lang=eng 1
Calm Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) This isn't a question for our fellow ''traditional'' Christians but for us LDS. How do you personally classify Heavenly Mother with our god language?God the Mother, imo. (if I am understanding you correctly) Edited June 18, 2015 by calmoriah
mfbukowski Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) I guess my best answer would have to be this: I am in my family. My family is my wife and son. My family is not in me. For it is impossible for my wife and son to be in me.Was your son once "in" you and your wife? Can you see that these distinctions are merely different ways of seeing? Is a pyramid a square or a triangle? If seen from the bottom it is one, and seen from the side it is another. There is no ONE "true" way of seeing a pyramid, they are all just different points of view. Do you know about the blind man and the elephant?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant Edited June 18, 2015 by mfbukowski
mfbukowski Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) Why do I think it is clear he does not want to learn at all but to entrap with sophistries? Anyone else think so? Edited June 18, 2015 by mfbukowski 1
Robert F. Smith Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Hey, Fly. Thanks for answering the question and letting me know there are three gods in one Godhead. So here is my confusion: Instead of saying Christ is in the Godhead, isn't Paul saying the Godhead is in Christ? For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.(Colossians 2:9) Paul is saying that Jesus Christ has full-fledged godness (Gottheit). Well, so do the other members of the Gottheit.
Robert F. Smith Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Well, I guess I haven't been clear with my questions. I'm not so concerned with how the word Godhead is defined. I'm trying to figure out how it is used. Let me ask a simple question to which you can give a simple answer of yes or no: Does Mormonism teach there are three gods in the Godhead?I notice that, for whatever reason, you don't actually engage in repartee. Do you fear actual discussion? You know, someone makes a statement, you react, etc. Then they react. Response, Rejoinder. Etc. On the Mormon Dialogue and Discussion Board.
Sp0ckrates Posted June 18, 2015 Author Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) To me, this would go towards what it means to be "in" someone.Jesus stated this in John 10:38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.It is a matter of unity. So Paul is saying that Jesus is in unity/harmony with the Godhead and the Godhead is in unity/harmony with Him.I guess Jesus' statement in John 10 doesn't make Paul's statement in Colossians 2 any clearer to me as it does to you. John 10 sounds more Trinitarian than Mormon--one God in three persons. But this discussion is not about non-Mormon concepts. I mean, what if I were to say to you, "Did you know my dad is in me? Well, he really is! And guess what? I'm also in him!" Wouldn't you think I was losing it? Wouldn't you be right to wonder if I was in my right mind? Who says that? Edited June 18, 2015 by Sp0ckrates
CV75 Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 I guess Jesus' statement in John 10 doesn't make Paul's statement in Colossians 2 any clearer to me as it does to you. John 10 sounds more Trinitarian than Mormon--one God in three persons. But this discussion is not about non-Mormon concepts.I mean, what if I were to say to you, "Did you know my dad is in me? Well, he really is! And guess what? I'm also in him!" Wouldn't you think I was losing it? Wouldn't you be right to wonder if I was in my right mind? Who says that?Genetically as well as in your thoughts, your father is in you. And since the day you came into his life, you are in his thoughts.
Sp0ckrates Posted June 18, 2015 Author Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) I'm not sure why Catholics would be that way, since they are not a bible only religion. But protestants really have backed themselves into a corner when it comes to the Bible and doctrine. When you claim something like sola scriptura you have to be willing to die on the sword of Bible unambiguity. Yes, that makes sense. Where a passage of the Bible seems ambiguous, a Catholic has the option of reviewing the official teachings of their church or the teachings of what they call the early church fathers. But one example of such ambiguity is this:And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.(Matthew 26:26)Catholics and Proestants both tell me the passage is absolutely unambiguous and say the other puts words in Jesus' mouth to make him say what he didn't say. Catholics tell me Jesus' meaning is obvious and Protestants misunderstand Jesus to say this:Take, eat; this is [like] my body.Protestants tell me Jesus' meaning is obvious and Catholics misunderstand Jesus to say this:Take, eat; this is my [actual] body.I think both are reading into Jesus' words their own preconceived ideas and find Jesus' statement at the last supper to be obviously ambiguous.But, just get a Lutheran and an Evangelical in the same room and ask them both whether or not baptism is necessary for salvation and see the sparks fly! (No disrespect to either religion intended).I suppose that depends on what Lutheran. A Lutheran in the Missouri Sinod would have little disagreement with an Evangelical who says baptism doesn't contribute to one's salvation. Of course, there would be discussion about the purpose of baptism and whether infants should be baptized.I honestly can't tell. I don't think we have enough information with just those verses alone to figure out exactly what they meant when they used that word (or whatever word they used that was translated into that word, i guess).You might be right. How about the other biblical verses from Acts and Romans. Do either of them clearly teach there are three gods in one Godhead?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.(Romans 1:20)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.(Acts 17:29) Edited June 18, 2015 by Sp0ckrates
Sp0ckrates Posted June 18, 2015 Author Posted June 18, 2015 Yes.Is the idea that the three are in the Godhead what Paul is saying? For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.(Colossians 2:9)Or is he saying something different, such as the Godhead is in the three?
Sp0ckrates Posted June 18, 2015 Author Posted June 18, 2015 I understand the context of the above to be that Jesus has the fullness of godhood, divinity, in him. The same can be said of the Father and the Holy Ghost. At the same time Jesus is a member of the Godhead - Jesus and the Father are not the same individual, God. They are separate and distinct. Jesus prays to the Father, begs him to allow the cup to pass from him, but it was Jesus' acceptance of the Father's will that sealed Jesus' choice to proceed with the crucifixion. I think it is important to take scripture in context with all other scripture. My understanding of the Godhead is based strictly on scripture. I understand how some can conclude differently, but only if they take scriptures out of context by focusing on a few while ignoring the rest. We use the term Godhead because it is in scripture.Yes, that makes sense. But to be clear: Are you saying Paul uses the word Godhead in a different way from the way Mormons use the word Godhead, but both ways are acceptable?
Bobbieaware Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Yes, that makes sense. Where a passage of the Bible seems ambiguous, a Catholic has the option of reviewing the official teachings of their church or the teachings of what they call the early church fathers. But one example of such ambiguity is this:And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.(Matthew 26:26)Catholics and Proestants both tell me the passage is absolutely unambiguous and say the other puts words in Jesus' mouth to make him say what he didn't say. Catholics tell me Jesus' meaning is obvious and Protestants misunderstand Jesus to say this:Take, eat; this is [like] my body.Protestants tell me Jesus' meaning is obvious and Catholics misunderstand Jesus to say this:Take, eat; this is my [actual] body.I think both are reading into Jesus' words their own preconceived ideas and find Jesus' statement at the last supper to be obviously ambiguous.I suppose that depends on what Lutheran. A Lutheran in the Missouri Sinod would have little disagreement with an Evangelical who says baptism doesn't contribute to one's salvation. Of course, there would be discussion about the purpose of baptism and whether infants should be baptized.You might be right. How about the other biblical verses from Acts and Romans. Do either of them clearly teach there are three gods in one Godhead?Christ clears up any ambiguity a few verses later. After saying, "verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you," some of his disciples were deeply troubled by the seemingly bizarre saying: 60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? (John 6) But the Lord then proceeds to explain the true meaning of his dark saying when he says: 63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. (John 6)So the Lord was using powerful metaphorical language to deeply impress upon the human mind that one's whole duty is to totally internalize Christ IN A SPIRITUAL SENSE. The actual eating of his physical body would prophet them absolutely nothing. 1
Storm Rider Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Yes, that makes sense. But to be clear: Are you saying Paul uses the word Godhead in a different way from the way Mormons use the word Godhead, but both ways are acceptable? Yes, in this context Paul is not attempting to describe the Godhead, but the divinity of the Christ. Said another way, when we see Jesus then we see the Father.
Sp0ckrates Posted June 18, 2015 Author Posted June 18, 2015 https://www.lds.org/manual/print/doctrines-of-the-gospel-student-manual/chapter-3-god-the-eternal-father?lang=engThat is helpful, Calmoriah. Thanks!
Sp0ckrates Posted June 18, 2015 Author Posted June 18, 2015 God the Mother, imo. (if I am understanding you correctly)Is it OK for this newbie to ask? Is God the Mother another way of referring to the Holy Ghost, or is she another?
Recommended Posts