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

[_Tobin]

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)

Then you misunderstand me. I'm not stating the Father was a man (or even human). I'm of the opinion he was humanoid and mortal at one point just as Christ was and Christ followed this example. That is the only pattern I'm stating here. I don't believe life evolves the same on other worlds (or that we even share a similar history).

[_huckelberry]

Then you misunderstand me. I'm not stating the Father was a man (or even human). I'm of the opinion he was humanoid and mortal at one point just as Christ was and Christ followed this example. That is the only pattern I'm stating here. I don't believe life evolves the same on other worlds (or that we even share a similar history).

Your response took me by suprise. I had not thought to ask whether the Father and Son were of the same biological species. I suppose one could ask. If they were different though similar species that would mark a clear seperation from the view Brigham Young considered with Adam God which to my mind may be the most consistent Mormon view. I think BY was a smart guy. But I am not Mormon and do not actually hold his views, my belief is Trinitarian.

I was trying to consider the simpler observation that the comment in John wheree Jesus reports doing what the Father does does not in itself break outside of Trinitarian relationships. The idea of the Father having a Father is a further step based upon different sources which does go outside of Trinitarian understanding.

[_Tobin]

Your response took me by suprise. I had not thought to ask whether the Father and Son were of the same biological species. I suppose one could ask. If they were different though similar species that would mark a clear seperation from the view Brigham Young considered with Adam God which to my mind may be the most consistent Mormon view. I think BY was a smart guy. But I am not Mormon and do not actually hold his views, my belief is Trinitarian.

I was trying to consider the simpler observation that the comment in John wheree Jesus reports doing what the Father does does not in itself break outside of Trinitarian relationships. The idea of the Father having a Father is a further step based upon different sources which does go outside of Trinitarian understanding.

I don't endorse BY's views. I don't think his views were enlightened and turns God into a mere man that must employ sex to procreate. I believe the scriptures are clear that Jesus arose from a virgin birth (from both Biblical and Mormon scriptures) and clearly no such thing as God having sex with Mary was done. The same could be said of the Adam/Eve story which I believe is mostly symbolic.

Also, I view this pattern that Jesus follows as being very old (it may be eternal) and gives me the strongest belief in God. In fact, given what we know, it is highly unlikely there is not a God. Imagine intelligent life that arose 10 billion years ago. How advanced and transcendant would they seem to us now? They would truly be able to do things that would seem miraculous to us and could certainly influence our development in a positive way as well. This is my core belief in the nature of God and why Jesus was born on this planet.

[_Drifting]

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, you seem to have fled from the immediate vicinity of my question to you....

[_lulu]

I'm not stating the Father was a man (or even human). I'm of the opinion he was humanoid and mortal at one point just as Christ was and Christ followed this example.

Could you slowly unpack that for the slow minded among us.

Let's start with Father was a mortal humnoid at one point but not a man. What does that mean? Are you saying God was a Neanderthal?

[_Drifting]

I'm not stating the Father was a man (or even human). I'm of the opinion he was humanoid and mortal at one point just as Christ was and Christ followed this example.

Could you slowly unpack that for the slow minded among us.

Let's start with Father was a mortal humnoid at one point but not a man. What does that mean? Are you saying God was a Neanderthal?

It is increasingly apparent that Tobin's hands are typing things his brain hasn't sanctioned for official publication.

[_ludwigm]

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.

Fine. Thank You.

You know, "8 We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly;"
Are You certain, that that parts of the Bible are translated correctly?


If I were You, I would read some harvests from the continuous revelations nowadays, for example:

http://www.LDS.org/ensign/1977/05/come- ... s?lang=eng

The Father’s name is Elohim;
Jehovah is his Son.
Above all Gods they stand supreme,
And rule the universe.

http://www.LDS.org/ensign/2002/04/the-f ... n?lang=eng

...God the Eternal Father, whom we designate by the exalted name-title “Elohim,” is the literal Parent of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and of the spirits of the human race. Elohim is the Father in every sense...
...Jesus Christ is the Son of Elohim both as spiritual and bodily offspring; that is to say, Elohim is literally the Father of the spirit of Jesus Christ and also the body in which Jesus Christ performed His mission in the flesh...
...Jesus Christ, whom we also know as Jehovah, was the executive of the Father, Elohim, in the work of creation...

http://www.LDS.org/ensign/1994/01/the-man-adam?lang=eng

As Michael, the archangel, Adam led the forces of God against the armies of Lucifer in the War in Heaven. Under the direction of Elohim and Jehovah, he assisted in the creation of the earth.

http://www.LDS.org/liahona/2000/12/chri ... r?lang=eng

In His premortal life, Jesus was Jehovah, the Creator.
...
Jesus, even in mortality, was a God. And why was He a God? Because He was the literal Son of Elohim.

http://www.LDS.org/search?lang=eng&star ... =magazines could produce to You more examples about Elohim and Jehovah!



Do I dare compare my age and supposed knowledge about the scriptures to the GA's age and supposed knowledge about the scriptures?

[_lulu]

Just another name for God.

Why does "God" have more than one name? That's the beginning of the Trinitarian question.

[_Drifting]

Ensign, Nov. 2007, pg 40; “Any criticism that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints does not hold the contemporary Christian view of God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost is not a comment about our commitment to Christ but rather a recognition (accurate, I might add) that our view of the Godhead breaks with post New Testament Christian history and returns to the doctrine taught by Jesus Himself.” – Jeffrey R. Holland, “The Only True God and Jesus Christ Whom He Hath Sent”

[_Tobin]

...

That's special. You'll find quoting a bunch of unresearched, unreferenced, and uninspired articles at me isn't likely to impress me in any way. Go find a TBM or bcspace. They might find this amusing or interesting. I find it to be only boring and incredibly stupid.