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

[_Drifting]

That is because you don't understand what God is.

As far as Mormonism is concerned, God is:
- someone who used to be a man.
- used as a name to label Heavenly Father, also Jesus Christ, also the Holy Ghost, also Michael who in turn becomes Adam.
- a name that we ourselves (I'm talking only to the men here) will be called when we get the keys to our own planets.
- one of a plethora of God's roaming the eternities.

All of the above points are factually accurate and consistent with Mormon Doctrine and Teachings.

Doesn't sound very Christian does it...

[_ludwigm]

That is because you don't understand what God is.

As far as Mormonism is concerned, God is:
- someone who used to be a man.
- used as a name to label Heavenly Father, also Jesus Christ, also the Holy Ghost, also Michael who in turn becomes Adam.
- a name that we ourselves (I'm talking only to the men here) will be called when we get the keys to our own planets.
- one of a plethora of God's roaming the eternities.

All of the above points are factually accurate and consistent with Mormon Doctrine and Teachings.

Doesn't sound very Christian does it...

You have maliciously left out the two most important ones:
- Jehovah
- Elohim

[_Tobin]

You have maliciously left out the two most important ones:
- Jehovah
- Elohim

He isn't likely to be factually accurate in anything he says about Mormonism, so there is no point in correcting him or even discussing it with him. He is disconnected from facts or what Mormons actually state they believe and he'll just make up the worst possible version anyway. I just let him say whatever asinine thing he wants to say since he is clearly not an honest broker and I give it all the considered response it deserves.

[_ludwigm]

You have maliciously left out the two most important ones:
- Jehovah
- Elohim

He isn't likely to be factually accurate in anything he says about Mormonism, so there is no point in correcting him or even discussing it with him. He is disconnected from facts or what Mormons actually state they believe and he'll just make up the worst possible version anyway. I just let him say whatever asinine thing he wants to say since he is clearly not an honest broker and I give it all the considered response it deserves.

You are the competent one, aren't You? Then don't introduce him to me.
You have the best version.

OK, then who are Jehovah and Elohim?

[_Drifting]

You have maliciously left out the two most important ones:
- Jehovah
- Elohim

He isn't likely to be factually accurate in anything he says about Mormonism, so there is no point in correcting him or even discussing it with him. He is disconnected from facts or what Mormons actually state they believe and he'll just make up the worst possible version anyway. I just let him say whatever asinine thing he wants to say since he is clearly not an honest broker and I give it all the considered response it deserves.

Unfortunately for you, Tobin, ludwigm knows me and my posting record far more than you do. But feel free to point out what I said that was factually incorrect...

[_Tobin]

OK, then who are Jehovah and Elohim?

Just another name for God. You'll find 'El', 'Elohim', 'YHWH' throughout the Old Testament in reference to God. I'm surprised you are asking such a basic question given your age and supposed knowledge about the scriptures. Oh well, it seems those that lose the spirit forget all they knew or should have known.

[_Brackite]

The Following Passages are from the Book of Mormon:

2 Nephi 31:

[21] And now, behold, my beloved brethren, this is the way; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God. And now, behold, this is the doctrine of Christ, and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is one God, without end. Amen.

Alma 11:

[44] Now, this restoration shall come to all, both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, both the wicked and the righteous; and even there shall not so much as a hair of their heads be lost; but every thing shall be restored to its perfect frame, as it is now, or in the body, and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit, which is one Eternal God, to be judged according to their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil.

Mormon 7:

[7] And he hath brought to pass the redemption of the world, whereby he that is found guiltless before him at the judgment day hath it given unto him to dwell in the presence of God in his kingdom, to sing ceaseless praises with the choirs above, unto the Father, and unto the Son, and unto the Holy Ghost, which are one God, in a state of happiness which hath no end.

[_huckelberry]

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.

Suppose it meant that the Father was once incarnate as human and suffered and died for a family of peoples lives. I gather that is what you are thinking. I do not understand how that would change the concept of the Trinity if it were true. It seems you see this as some key distinction. I am curious as to how it is.

I have seen some LDS people speak and think in ways very close to Trinitarian while other speak in ways quite far removed. If you think of god as a status then it is quite remote from those who think of it as a fundamental sort of being which is the source of all other being.

[_Tobin]

Suppose it meant that the Father was one incarnate as human and suffered and died for some family of peoples life. I gather that is what you are thinking. I do not understand how that would change the concept of the Trinity if it were true. It seems you see this as some key distinction.

This is outside the bounds of any understanding of the Trinity. Certainly the obvious implication is that God the Father also had a Father and did all he had seen his Father do - would be rejected by Trinitarians. Nor could they imagine how this continues on in that Jesus will become the Father and this pattern will repeat (and is repeated throughout the universe). As far as I know, this is unique only to Mormonism.

[_huckelberry]

Suppose it meant that the Father was one incarnate as human and suffered and died for some family of peoples life. I gather that is what you are thinking. I do not understand how that would change the concept of the Trinity if it were true. It seems you see this as some key distinction.

This is outside the bounds of any understanding of the Trinity. Certainly the obvious implication is that God the Father also had a Father and did all he had seen his Father do - would be rejected by Trinitarians. Nor could they imagine how this continues on in that Jesus will become the Father and this pattern will repeat (and is repeated throughout the universe). As far as I know, this is unique only to Mormonism.

To say that God has a father is clearly outside of Trinitarian thinking. I wasnot asking about that belief held by some Mormons. I was following simply the comment Jesus made about doing what the Father does. I should be clear, I do not believe that the Father was ever made man. I have no reason to ,no reason I can think of to think that he was. I was just considering that I know of nothing about the concept of the Trinity which would prevent that. (though presenting no reason to expect it either)