The Trinity Questions – For Traditional Christians - Page 10

Elrond · #91 (**permalink**) 12-06-2008, 07:10 PM

I do not believe in the "traditional" Christian trinity. I was a traditional Christian for many years. I am not LDS either but I relate to many LDS beliefs. I am so unorthodox that most Christian churches view me as strange or even a child of satan. I won't even get into it but I've been through the ringer - persecuted by my own "bretheren" if that's what they were.

My basic argument about the trinity is when people say "God in 3 persons." Well, Jesus is a person. Ok. But God is a SPIRIT and they that worship him must worship in spirit and in truth. The Holy Spirit is a spirit and I see nowhere anywhere the Holy Spirit manifests as a "person."
I believe God is ONE, yet God is in and also Jesus and the Holy Spirit. We are ONE person but we have a body a soul and a spirit. We are not a trinity. We are one. We are a tripartate being, but still one individual. We are not 3 persons. We are made in the image of God: 3 things that make up one entity. We are also a part of God, so maybe they should really say God is a Quadrinity: father, Son, Holy Spirit, and us. !

Mudcat · #92 (**permalink**) 12-07-2008, 09:38 PM

Hi Anthony B,

I hope you don't mind, but I had to do some font changes to your words to make it easier to respond..... but I left your text intact. Just to qualify my statements, I am an Evangelical Christian. I serve in a SBC church, but don't adhere to all SBC doctrine and consider myself simply a Christian, not a Baptist Christian. In short, I can speak for me and that's about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AnthonyB

LDS often post questions that make me think they don’t fully understand what non-LDS believe. I have written some questions that I would like non-LDS Christians to respond to and hopefully if we get enough responses, LDS will have a better understanding of what we believe.

1) Are the persons of the Trinity capable of expressing emotion to each other? (ie can they love each other)

Yes, I believe this to be true. I would confine this emotional expression to those relating to love, for the most part. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are all perfect, so it seems that negative emotion would be contrary. I do feel there might be one exception to that, in Isaiha 53:10 it says

Isa 53:10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

Don't really know what to think about that, but thought I might mention it.

Quote:

2) Are they capable of communicating with each other?

Sure.

Quote:

3) Can they be in differing spatial locations? (ie differing places, the Father was not crucified with the Son)

That's a good question. The way I see it, we have an omni-present Father. I adhere to the belief that the Father is a Spirit, I don't attach physicality to him. God is in all things... the good, the bad and the ugly. We can't run from him so the Father is everywhere.... so spatially he is everywhere. So I don't think you can be in a spatial location that the Father isn't in.

Christ on the other hand has a body. I suppose you could say he can be in specific spatial locations, but he can't be anywhere the Father isn't.

The Holy Ghost lives within the hearts of believers. Though he can also convict the hearts of sinners. Like Christ, I think he can be in specific locations and distinctly more than one. If he is in me and in someone else, but not in all places.

Quote:

4) Will Jesus maintain his resurrected body in heaven?

Another good question and I suppose there is a bit of debate about it.
But IMO, yes. That is my belief.

Quote:

5) Is holding to the historic creeds…

a. essential for salvation
b. good for spiritual health but not an absolute requirement
c. not important
d. other…Please specify

I answered other. Relating to point A, I don't think a belief in the Trinity is essential to salvation. If that were the case, the very early Church would have damned IMO. In present days, such a restrictive view would damn 'Oneness Pentecostals' for their modalistic perspective as well as LDS with their the Godhead.... , among others who equally have a real testimony of Christ. The Savior I know, follow and love is not this sort of fellow.

In regards to point B and C, I think the Trinity is a very solid attempt for man to understand the mysteries of God. I am of the opinion that at least in 325, at Nicaea, when the first creed in regards to the Trinity was laid out, that this belief was the product of what the majority of the Church in that time believed. And for that reason it bears some importance.

Given the traditions of the RCC and EOC, this view seems to have held the status quo for some time now.... at least in regards to the bulk of those who take the name of Christ. I think it is healthy to understand the concept, but I think it is much more healthy to do your best to pickup your cross and follow Christ.

The reason I answered other, is because I agree with Paul in many respects. It's probably better for us to preach Christ and him crucified, than over exert our attentions on things that are mysteries that we can only see dimly now. I for one am guilty of such over exertions at times. I've contemplated what I think and what other people seem to believe on this issue. The Bible would say that God winks at a good bit of ignorance, I think this is one of those things he winks at, though it is fun to discuss.

Respectfully,

Mudcat

Hemidakota · #93 (**permalink**) 12-08-2008, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elrond

I do not believe in the "traditional" Christian trinity. I was a traditional Christian for many years. I am not LDS either but I relate to many LDS beliefs. I am so unorthodox that most Christian churches view me as strange or even a child of satan. I won't even get into it but I've been through the ringer - persecuted by my own "bretheren" if that's what they were.

My basic argument about the trinity is when people say "God in 3 persons." Well, Jesus is a person. Ok. But God is a SPIRIT and they that worship him must worship in spirit and in truth. The Holy Spirit is a spirit and I see nowhere anywhere the Holy Spirit manifests as a "person."
I believe God is ONE, yet God is in and also Jesus and the Holy Spirit. We are ONE person but we have a body a soul and a spirit. We are not a trinity. We are one. We are a tripartate being, but still one individual. We are not 3 persons. We are made in the image of God: 3 things that make up one entity. We are also a part of God, so maybe they should really say God is a Quadrinity: father, Son, Holy Spirit, and us. !

IF GOD was a spirit, how could I hug him and shake HIS hand?

prisonchaplain · #94 (**permalink**) 12-08-2008, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hemidakota

IF GOD was a spirit, how could I hug him and shake HIS hand?

A popular worship chorus:

Surely the presence of the Lord is in this place
I can feel his mighty power and his grace
I can hear the brush of angels' wings, I see glory on each face
Surely the presence of the Lord is in this place!

AnthonyB · #95 (**permalink**) 12-08-2008, 03:29 PM

Mudcat,

Thx for the response, you and I have much in common. I would be happy to stick to the things that are a priority to God, to a large decree what we are discussing is IMHO not essential or God would have made it clearer. But in trying to understand LDS I have had to dig into these things because that is where much of the difference between us lie. (I enjoy dicussing them even though it may not in all honesty be the most productive use of my time, I trust God can forgive me that human failing!)

LDS posters,

That is in 5/5 for socail trinitartians.

Everyone,

I think the pertinent questions are what is "spirit"?
How is God's omnipresence worked out?

Both immensely difficult questions.

What is "spirit"?

We have it but it is bound to our bodies whilst we live. On death our spirit is de-embodied, only to be reembodied at the resurection.

However the resurrected body is spoken about by Paul as a "spiritual body", as if almost in the Eastern Orthodox way of thinking it is a new hybrid or intermingleling of the two realms.

Angles are spirits but definitely "appear" in "human-like" bodily form. Except for Cherubim and Seraphim and the whole six wing thing.

Demons and Satan are fallen angels but unlike angels generally indwell other creatures not take a seperate perceivable form.

God's omnipresence

This is one of the things where I really struggle to grasp an LDS idea. If God has a body and is stuck on a planet, a long way from earth, how then does he hear our prayers or innermost thoughts. How does He interact with people from such a long distance. What do you do with "in Him we live and move and have our being"? It appears for me to turn Father God from always capable of being with me (no matter where, no matter when) to a long gone absent Dad, whose left His children and moved on.

For me I don't understand how he can manifest in the myriad way he appears to in scripture unless he is a spirit. I do not doubt that if He chose to He could be perceived by us as being in human form (as angels do) but that is our perception not His reality. (I could conceive that Joseph Smith may have percieved God and Jesus as he reported he did but that is His perception from this side of the veil not necessarily the reality of the situation.)

Islander · #96 (**permalink**) 12-08-2008, 03:30 PM

This is one of those passages that my friend Rabi Jaski described as " trying the edge of a knife with your tongue." Quite dangerous and not recommended. He was born on Mexico by the way.

We find ourselves in serious disadvantage when reading the OT and the NT in the translated languages. In Hebrew the word translated "spirit" by the KJV translators was applied to:

His word
His finger
His hand
His breath

So, trying to harmonize that God is a "spirit" from the text in the literal sense will no doubt land you into trouble. There is significantly stronger evidence from the same scriptures that God has a physical body. Although obviously much different from ours in substance, morphologically similar to ours.

Early Rabi in and out of Israel believed and stated that God indeed had a physical body. The history of idolatry in Israel precipitated later generations of rabbinical scholars to avoid the subject all together initially, and later to denied such doctrine.

Hemidakota · #97 (**permalink**) 12-09-2008, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prisonchaplain

A popular worship chorus:

Surely the presence of the Lord is in this place
I can feel his mighty power and his grace
I can hear the brush of angels' wings, I see glory on each face
Surely the presence of the Lord is in this place!

Have you hug the FATHER?

Traveler · #98 (**permalink**) 12-10-2008, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prisonchaplain

A popular worship chorus:

Surely the presence of the Lord is in this place
I can feel his mighty power and his grace
I can hear the brush of angels' wings, I see glory on each face
Surely the presence of the Lord is in this place!

What is ment by:
"I can feel his mighty power"?
"I can hear the brush of angels' wings"?

The Traveler

prisonchaplain · #99 (**permalink**) 12-10-2008, 06:36 PM

I can feel the hug of my Heavenly Father more powerfully than that of my earthly one, despite his non-corporeal nature. Surely there are some testimonies that are more sure than anything the physical realm can produce. No?

ninjormon · #**100** (**permalink**) 12-11-2008, 04:37 AM

I was raised in the Bible belt, (the south) we went to different churches, none of them taught the same thing as the other, each had thier own preacher and for the most part went along with whatever he said to be true, the most bizare was the speaking in tounges, when they baptised me as a child they pulled me out of the water and told me to repeat certain words over and over, when I got tounge tied they shook me violently saying almost there, almost there. The preachers that did "speak in tounges" said the same mumbo jumbo over and over.