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

[_lulu]

Are you really sure you want to run with image?

It isn't a forced assimulation if that is what you are saying, but the concept is sound and consistent with scriptures. We become one with God by choice and doing what God says till we also are one in agreement with that will and purpose. This is what JC was praying for.

Well, it's your choice, Borg/Morg you will be assimilated.

The issue is that your borg formulation is tritheistic not monotheistic. That's OK with me. But it was not OK with many early Christians. They felt it important to remain true to the strict monotheism that developed in Judaism.

Marcion tried to go a different route and take Christianity out of the Judaic tradition. His brand failed so Christianity was stuck with monotheism.

On the other hand, it was clear the market growth was coming from the Grecified who want Jesus to be more than just a prophet, they wanted a nice Greek man God.

What to do with these Jews and Greeks if you head the marketing department with a nasty Roman Emperor chairing the meeting?

You can have as many "Greek Gods" as you wanted (although it was limited to 3 in Christianity) as long as they all had the same substance. Same substance made them one God. (Yes, I've trampled a bit on the "persona" issue to make the one substance point. Like I said, its not easy to describe things that don't exist).

One substance maintained the link with Judaism, Marcion's bad product finessed.

One in purpose or will is OK with me as a description of a non-exsitant, but it just doesn't happen to be montheistic.

Key word "substance" not "will" not "purpose".

--lulu, demonstrating why he does history instead of theology.

[_Tobin]

Trinitarians do believe that Christ is resurrected with his physical body. The whole point of the incarnation was that God in Christ became one of us and rose from the dead so that we can be resurrected in Christ's image. We just don't believe God the Father or the Holy Spirit have physical bodies. Most Christians believe in theosis in the sense that we will someday become gods since we will be raised with Christ, but that doesn't mean we will become God in the sense that Father, Son and Holy Spirit exist eternally as God.
I don't know where you get your understanding of traditional Christian theology, but I would have to say it is off base. Jesus didn't get rid of his physical body after his resurrection. No orthodox Christian believes that.

I didn't say otherwise, please try to read what I said and not make bad assumptions. Here is what I said:

Also, I agree that Mormons often make the mistake of assuming that Trinitarians believe in the need for the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ and that Jesus Christ must still be a physcial being (or that Trinitarians have any understanding of why it was necessary for God to have a physical manifestation, die, and be resurrected in the first place).

What I said is you don't really understand the need for this and why this happens or necessarily believe that God has a resurrected body (or why this must be so). And you yourself said that God is spirtual:

You're the one claiming it makes no sense. Try looking at the diagram presented a little earlier and you might catch it. Coexistent just means God exists spiritually at the same time in three separate persons not that they coexist as the same physical thing. They are always three separate persons with the same spiritual reality -- and remember that in traditional Christian thought spirit is not something material as it is for the LDS. God is pure spirit, not a physical thing. The mind of God is a reality that exists outside of matter.

Mormonism just gives us additional information about God and why all this happened in the first place. It also helps us understand that has happened before and will happen again in the future and happens all over the universe and isn't something unique to our world (another thing that Trinitarians really don't have a concept of).

[_Tobin]

The issue is that your borg formulation is tritheistic not monotheistic. That's OK with me. But it was not OK with many early Christians. They felt it important to remain true to the strict monotheism that developed in Judaism.

You need to watch more Star Trek because you really don't understand the concept if you can state what you said.

[_lulu]

The issue is that your borg formulation is tritheistic not monotheistic. That's OK with me. But it was not OK with many early Christians. They felt it important to remain true to the strict monotheism that developed in Judaism.

You need to watch more Star Trek because you really don't understand the concept if you can state what you said.

I agree, we should all watch more Star Trek

[_SteelHead]

Who would win in a fist fight: Gimli son of Gloin or Legolas?

Or more on topic: Kirk or Piccard?

Once you realize it is just some ones opinion on a bunch of fiction, the debate, while entertaining, looses any other value.

I say the god is more like a mass of pasta. Have you been touched by his noodlely appendage?

[_BartBurk]

Mormonism just gives us additional information about God and why all this happened in the first place. It also helps us understand that has happened before and will happen again in the future and happens all over the universe and isn't something unique to our world (another thing that Trinitarians really don't have a concept of).

And that is where Mormonism goes off track because it contradicts the Bible. I also believe it contradicts Mormon scripture, especially the Book of Mormon. Is it possible that resurrected humans continue eternally to provide bodies for the spirits God creates? That in my mind is at least plausible. To believe there were Gods prior to our God contradicts scripture completely.

[_Tobin]

And that is where Mormonism goes off track because it contradicts the Bible. I also believe it contradicts Mormon scripture, especially the Book of Mormon. Is it possible that resurrected humans continue eternally to provide bodies for the spirits God creates? That in my mind is at least plausible. To believe there were Gods prior to our God contradicts scripture completely.

That is because you don't understand what God is. Jesus Christ did all he saw his father do. What that means is that God the Father was a physical being and saved his generations and just as Christ did. This is what God does. This is what God is. God is a unity of purpose that saves and provides for mortal kind in setting a perfect example and saves and exalts us to be with God. This world isn't unique in all the universe (and I know Trinitarians would like to believe so but the concept is ludicrous) to have as savior. This isn't the only planet with intelligent life. Trinitarians just don't get it. They have a very small understanding of God. They don't understand this is one eternal round that happens over and over again all over the universe and throughout time.

[_Buffalo]

That is because you don't understand what God is. Jesus Christ did all he saw his father do. What that means is that God the Father was a physical being and saved his generations and just as Christ did. This is what God does. This is what God is. God is a unity of purpose that saves and provides for mortal kind in setting a perfect example and saves and exalts us to be with God. This world isn't unique in all the universe (and I know Trinitarians would like to believe so but the concept is ludicrous) to have as savior. This isn't the only planet with intelligent life. Trinitarians just don't get it. They have a very small understanding of God. They don't understand this is one eternal round that happens over and over again all over the universe and throughout time.

Jesus never explained what it was he saw his father doing that he was emulating, or how he was emulating it.

[_Tobin]

Jesus never explained what it was he saw his father doing that he was emulating, or how he was emulating it.

No. He didn't. So, it is open to interpretation. I have given the Mormon answer, but I'd point out that it isn't inconsistent with the scriptures as is often claimed.

[_gdemetz]

The Apostles Creed was a "take off" from the earlier one. Great post Tobin (your 826th one)! It only contradicts the Bible as they understand it. Did the other so called Christians religions ever explain how Adam was made from the dust of the earth, and yet at the same time could be the son of God? These are both Biblical statements, but until Brigham Young (I think that this was taught to him by Joseph Smith) explained it clearly, they were, as usual, lost as a goose in a hailstorm!