Is this true?
Mormons beleive that the Trinity is not one God whose essence is found in three persons, but three Gods - three distinct bodies (the Holy Ghost only has a spirit body; He has never been able to become a man). Despite the teachings of father, Son and Holy Gohst as one God in BOM and in ealy revelatiosn in D&C, Smith later taught that the Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost were distinct personages - three idstinct Gods (see D&C 20:28) In his Documentary History of the Chrcuh, Smith made light of the Trinity, saying, "It woul make a strange God anyhow...he would be a giant or a mosnter."
The three of them are one god, the same way 9 justices are one supreme court. The incomprehensible trinity that's taught by many churches is biblically unfounded.
So sure, we believe that they are one God, but not in the same manner as the rest of christianity. ie Christ didn't pray to himself, Stephen really did see Christ on the right hand of God, not his own right hand, etc.
And I don't see how that comment makes light of anything, just points out how strange the trinity doctrine sounds. One god in 3 persons, but still only one... indivisible, but divided, etc. doesn't make sense and is not found in the bible (the place they claim to be getting it from).
As for the Book of Mormon and D&C they are pretty much in line with what the bible says on the matter.
Originally posted by docb77
The three of them are one god, the same way 9 justices are one supreme court. The incomprehensible trinity that's taught by many churches is biblically unfounded.So sure, we believe that they are one God, but not in the same manner as the rest of christianity. ie Christ didn't pray to himself, Stephen really did see Christ on the right hand of God, not his own right hand, etc.
And I don't see how that comment makes light of anything, just points out how strange the trinity doctrine sounds. One god in 3 persons, but still only one... indivisible, but divided, etc. doesn't make sense and is not found in the bible (the place they claim to be getting it from).
As for the Book of Mormon and D&C they are pretty much in line with what the bible says on the matter.
We're not trying to be catholic, we're trying to relate our doctrine to what you understand.
It is, however, a folly of ours that we tend to hide behind the bible and shy away from the Book of Mormon when introducing our faith, because the bible is known and accepted.
We seem to say something like, here's this book called the Book of Mormon it's great, (putting it aside) but here is what the bible says, see, see, see. We need to be better at sharing the simplicity of God's word in the Book of mormon, which has very beautiful doctrines that are lost from the bible.
As for the mention of one God in our doctrine (and in the bible also), when they say the are one, it means one in purpose. Their wills are completely aligned, and they strive for the same thing.
here, in the doctrine and covenants chapter 50 verse 43 it says:
And the father and I are one. I am in the father and the father in me; and inasmuch as ye have received me, ye are in me and I in you.
So by one they mean in spirit and purpose, that's why it says we can be in Christ and he can be in us, we can be aligned in purpose as he and the father are.
Originally posted by Eis
Is it me or does it seem like many mormons on this thread try to seem as most catholic as possible? Like they try to distance themselves as little as they can.
What sounded catholic? I'm mystified on that one.
Funny thing is an educated mormon should be able to relate to/find truth in just about any world religion, catholicism included. Several LDS prophets have said that other churches have some of the truth.
So like dorkerina says, we do tend to try to relate our beliefs in a way that will be understood by those to whom we are speaking. We do use some of the same language as the rest of christianity, but we use it in slightly different ways.
example: Being saved - in many religions, the picture is that after you die you go to heaven which is some sort of place either full of clouds and harps and singing, or a tropical paradise without a care in the world.
The mormons see being saved as actually having two meanings. physical and spiritual; the physical resurrection being a free gift to all, but the spiritual salvation entails the necessity of faith and work. Both are possible because of grace. The LDS idea of heaven is just more complex. Basically you get what you deserve. If you fill all the requirements, you get to go to the top and live like God lives. Good people who didn't quite fulfill all the requirements get a portion of the good life(lot's better than we have here), but not the whole shebang. And evil people get a reward comensurate with their life as well.
As far as the trinity is concerned...I believe its much like our Bishopric or the First Presidency.
For example, the Bishopric has a Bishop and a 1st and 2nd Counselor...but they are one Bishopric.
The First Presidency has the Prophet and a 1st and 2nd Counselor. They are the First Presidency, but all of them are titled "Presidents" and have the same Priesthood Office of Apostle. They are all Prophets, Seers, and Revelators...but one First Presidency, and one designated Prophet for the whole church.
The Trinity is no different. You have God the Father, and Jesus Christ as 1st Counselor (on the right hand), and the Holy Ghost as 2nd Counselor. All of them are 'gods' but the Father is the only, capital G, God.
That's how I see it.
Is this the place I can pose challanges to the Mormons faith
Why not...it seems to be a catch all...as long as its friendly.
I'm having a tough time dealing with some members at an online LDS board lately. I feel really bad that I get so frustrated when people don't take me or things I say seriously when its something that isn't a culturally common viewpoint.
I don't like how it makes me feel...and I'm feeling pretty rotten right now.
I think I've come to the conclusion you can't talk about controversial things among members. It never turns out well.
One of my friend's mom frequents that board (or one like it), I think she was having problems also, or some of her friends were. They were asking questions that made people mad and got kicked off. Thats too bad. I once heard that President Hinkley encourages tough discussions sometimes. He doesn't want us to be ignorant, and anything that is hard, can eventually gotten over and just make us stronger.
Feel free to start discussing, we'll just let you know if it gets too intense or sensitive or whatever. 😄
BTW sorry they were making you uncomfortable, or being rude, I'll try not to do anything like that.
Oh, and are you a member?
I almost forgot. A missionary was killed in Argentina, he got hit by a car. Presumably the driver was drunk, becuase he was on the wrong side of the road. Pray for his family.
Originally posted by tlbauerle
I think I've come to the conclusion you can't talk about controversial things among members. It never turns out well.
another mormon here 😛
I think I know what you mean... it all depends on who you talk to. Some people won't even let you get a question out before they raise the warning flag. On the other hand, I have teachers who will listen empathetically to almost any question I have, and try to see it from my point of view. It makes me more susceptible to their point, anyways. 🙂
Yeah...I am a member.
It just seems like any discussion worth having over there gets locked down rather quickly because everyone resorts to bickering and belittling.
There is zero discussion. If you have an opposing or desenting point of view, you aren't taken seriously.
For example is Polygamy. Too many members are so beligerant about the church's polygamy past. They either think the church is true, except for that revelation...or that there is no plural marriage in the Celestial Kingdom. People can have their own opinions, but why would you belittle someone who disagrees?
The other issue is politics. If you say anything outside of the mainstream political views within the culture, you are seen as a wacko and a nut job. It's really frustrating because in my Patriarchal Blessing it says to be knowledgable about what's going on in the world and to educate myself. I try to do that, and then feel responsible to at least share my opinion, but it seems in the area of politics, members don't want to hear another view point. It seems to me that is the ONE area where we all should listen to another view point.
If you guys can Netflix the movie THIS DIVIDED STATE, it talks about the extreme political division in Utah...and some of the members in this documentary are everything BUT Christlike.
Its kind of disheartening.
Yeah, it can be. But it's not just members who get sensitive about politics.
That's a tough topic everywhere.
Anyways, I'm a debater, and try to stay up on things too, we oughta talk sometimes. I've learned from my class to get over peoples political opinion, so I won't hold it against you. A cool head is important.
Anyways, I thought it was interesting, and have thought a lot about what one of the general authorities said in general conference. I think we all need to look at it. He said differing poloitcal views give us no reason to be demeaing or rude. That hit me, because we all harbor political prejudices in one way or another (in general at least, like toward a group).
We'll keep that in mind. 😉
I learned something cool in seminary today.
So, here are the three reasons Jesus is sometimes referred to as Lord or Father in the scriptures:
1. Divine investiture
It's kind of like when a king gives his seal to a person under him, and that person is to carry out his will, and people accept it as the kings.
God has given Christ power like his, so he can do the things God asks, and we accept what Christ says to be God's word.
2. He's our Savior
When we are baptized it symbolizes a spiritual rebirth, and remission of sins. That was made possible by Christ, so he is the Father of our rebirth.
3. Creator
Christ is the literal creator of the earth under the father's instruction, that is pretty reason enough for him to gain the title father or lord.