Mormon's Criticized for not Accepting the "Trinity" Doctrine

[_MsJack]

Full resolution version available here.

My feelings are that, at its heart, the Trinity is an attempt to reconcile two conflicting sets of data in the Bible: there is only one God, and there are three different entities seen acting and behaving as God. If people want to call the Trinity's solution to the problem stupid and contradictory, I guess I can't stop them. For my own part, it's a contradiction that can be maintained because it's about a divine entity, not a human entity.

However, I don't take well to that kind of stone-throwing from Mormons, who put out a much more logically contradictory document for much sillier reasons quite recently, i. e. the Family Proclamation. Insisting that an equal partner may preside over another equal partner is every bit as much an abortion of logic as the Trinity will ever be accused of being, only since the presiding-equality pertains to human entities, and not divine ones, there is no potential escape clause.

So, glass houses, stones, you get it.

[_just me]

Every time Ms.Jack posts I get this overwhelming feeling of love and happiness.

[_MsJack]

Another infographic by my co-blogger Tim @ LDS & Evangelical Conversations (full resolution version here):

[_Tobin]

The Chirstian Trinity is equivalent to a mythical 3-headed hydra. Basically, GF, JC, and HG are the same being, but different aspects of God.

The Mormon concept is that these are distinct, separate beings but united in their purpose and will. They are God for all practical purposes and a comparison could be made between this concept and Star Trek's borg, without the lasers and nanobots. I believe this is the correct concept since JC commands us to be one in exactly the same way God is as well:

D&C 38:27 Behold, this I have given unto you as a parable, and it is even as I am. I say unto you, be one; and if ye are not one ye are not mine.

This is also stated in the New Testament

John 10:30 I and my Father are one.

And then Christ makes the following prayer:

John 17:21 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.
John 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

Certainly, the Trinity makes little to no sense in this context and only the Mormon view can be correct.

[Guest]

Full resolution version available here.

My feelings are that, at its heart, the Trinity is an attempt to reconcile two conflicting sets of data in the Bible: there is only one God, and there are three different entities seen acting and behaving as God. If people want to call the Trinity's solution to the problem stupid and contradictory, I guess I can't stop them. For my own part, it's a contradiction that can be maintained because it's about a divine entity, not a human entity.

However, I don't take well to that kind of stone-throwing from Mormons, who put out a much more logically contradictory document for much sillier reasons quite recently, i. e. the Family Proclamation. Insisting that an equal partner may preside over another equal partner is every bit as much an abortion of logic as the Trinity will ever be accused of being, only since the presiding-equality pertains to human entities, and not divine ones, there is no potential escape clause.

So, glass houses, stones, you get it.

That was an excellent illustration of the Trinity. I think the most important thing Mormons refuse to understand is that we are discussing philosophical reality not physical reality since God in traditional Christian thought is not a physical thing. I would go further and add that even if all three members of the Godhead became physical beings I don't believe it would change the philosophical reality at all -- all three members of the Godhead would be eternally divine regardless of their physical existence and could be described as one eternal God.

[_BartBurk]

The Chirstian Trinity is equivalent to a mythical 3-headed hydra. Basically, GF, JC, and HG are the same being, but different aspects of God.

That's modalism, not the Trinity.

[_Buffalo]

Full resolution version available here.

My feelings are that, at its heart, the Trinity is an attempt to reconcile two conflicting sets of data in the Bible: there is only one God, and there are three different entities seen acting and behaving as God. If people want to call the Trinity's solution to the problem stupid and contradictory, I guess I can't stop them. For my own part, it's a contradiction that can be maintained because it's about a divine entity, not a human entity.

However, I don't take well to that kind of stone-throwing from Mormons, who put out a much more logically contradictory document for much sillier reasons quite recently, i. e. the Family Proclamation. Insisting that an equal partner may preside over another equal partner is every bit as much an abortion of logic as the Trinity will ever be accused of being, only since the presiding-equality pertains to human entities, and not divine ones, there is no potential escape clause.

So, glass houses, stones, you get it.

Thanks for that. I know as a believing LDS my idea of what the trinity was was actually modalism.

[Guest]

I'm no good at drawing.

My take:

Jews: strongly monotheisitic
Pagans: polytheistic

What Latin or Greek words can we come up with so people from these very different backgrounds can be members of the same church.

Latin: consubstantialem - consubstantial
Greek: homooúsios - same substance

Describing something that doesn't exist in terms that a wide number of people can agree on is such a challenge.

It's all about words.

[_Tobin]

The Chirstian Trinity is equivalent to a mythical 3-headed hydra. Basically, GF, JC, and HG are the same being, but different aspects of God.

That's modalism, not the Trinity.

Ummm, no. The analogy is pretty good. The Trinity teaches there is one God in three eternal coexistent persons: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (or three heads to the hydra). So basically, trinitarians believe in a hydra. And Jesus prays that we'll all be part of that hydra one day too. It makes no sense.

[_lulu]

It makes no sense.

The Mormon belief makes no sense either in terms of monotheism.

Now, Tobin, what's your definition and view of Modalism?