The Trinity Questions – For Traditional Christians

[AnthonyB]

mel,

Could you, when you get a chance, answer my questions at the beginning of the tread, it would increase my sample....

[AnthonyB]

Hijolly,

It is the lack of "transcendentalness" in LDS expression that does get me perplexed.

LDS are so concerned in hammering home the manifest that it seems to leave God as a mere "super" man.

I believe in a God, who has revealed that He is always with me, that there is no where I could go to escape Him. A God who knows my innermost thoughts and hearts intentions better then I know them myself. A God who is the ultimate expression of infinite love, mercy, goodness, kindness. God is my "childhood" hero, my perfect examplar. I strive to be hopefully ever more like Him knowing that an eternity of trying would only be the beginning of the journey.

Somehow having Him live on a planet near a star called Kolob, with a real body and as a man who managed to work his way to Godhood leaves Him sounding (to me) as much less divine. I don't comprehend that the things in above paragraph which I hold dear about God would be compatable with the LDS vision of God.

Of course the answer would be Jesus, who was fully God and fully man. However LDS don't appear to have a dual nature Christology and the idea of the limiting/masking divine nature by assuming manhood. Your Father God is permanently incarnate and simultaneously unlimitedly divine.

[Traveler]

Originally Posted by AnthonyB

Hijolly,

It is the lack of "transcendentalness" in LDS expression that does get me perplexed.

LDS are so concerned in hammering home the manifest that it seems to leave God as a mere "super" man.

I believe in a God, who has revealed that He is always with me, that there is no where I could go to escape Him. A God who knows my innermost thoughts and hearts intentions better then I know them myself. A God who is the ultimate expression of infinite love, mercy, goodness, kindness. God is my "childhood" hero, my perfect examplar. I strive to be hopefully ever more like Him knowing that an eternity of trying would only be the beginning of the journey.

Somehow having Him live on a planet near a star called Kolob, with a real body and as a man who managed to work his way to Godhood leaves Him sounding (to me) as much less divine. I don't comprehend that the things in above paragraph which I hold dear about God would be compatable with the LDS vision of God.

Of course the answer would be Jesus, who was fully God and fully man. However LDS don't appear to have a dual nature Christology and the idea of the limiting/masking divine nature by assuming manhood. Your Father God is permanently incarnate and simultaneously unlimitedly divine.

It seems to me that your expression of Jesus

Jesus, who was fully God and fully man

is:
1. Never expressed in scripture
2. A complete contradiction of itself
3. Meaningless and not connected with reality
4. More closely associated with pagan thought than Christianity.
5. Far more flawed that all your criticism of LDS combined.

I would point out to you your statement:

I strive to be hopefully ever more like Him

is the essence of the LDS doctrine that:

1. We were created to be "like" him.
2. The destiny of man is to be so like him that we are one - which is an ancient term meaning that there is no distinguishable or recognizable difference


The Traveler

[HiJolly]

Originally Posted by AnthonyB

Hijolly,

It is the lack of "transcendentalness" in LDS expression that does get me perplexed.

LDS are so concerned in hammering home the manifest that it seems to leave God as a mere "super" man.

I hope you don't mind me being this blunt, but I would NEVER describe God as a "mere" ANYTHING.

He fills me to overflowing with Fire, with Love, with Joy. I'll grant each of these is an aspect of His transcendent Self and Oneness, but hey, that's why I'm a mystic, after all.

But I'm also a Mormon, and each of these great experiences has occurred within an LDS context. So, I'm both. And VERY happy. As the mysteries begin to unfold before me, I start to see how they all fit together. I have to unlearn some things, but ultimately everything I have learned simply strengthens and supports the LDS Church and its mission. I can't express how happy I am about that.

Originally Posted by AnthonyB

I believe in a God, who has revealed that He is always with me, that there is no where I could go to escape Him. A God who knows my innermost thoughts and hearts intentions better then I know them myself. A God who is the ultimate expression of infinite love, mercy, goodness, kindness. God is my "childhood" hero, my perfect examplar. I strive to be hopefully ever more like Him knowing that an eternity of trying would only be the beginning of the journey.

I know how you feel. Except 'eternity' is an awfully big word, ya know? Almost as big as God. Doctrine and Covenants 19

Originally Posted by AnthonyB

Somehow having Him live on a planet near a star called Kolob, with a real body and as a man who managed to work his way to Godhood leaves Him sounding (to me) as much less divine. I don't comprehend that the things in above paragraph which I hold dear about God would be compatable with the LDS vision of God.

I do. It is helpful, I think, to keep separate stuff LDS leaders have said, and what the LDS Church accepts as doctrine. Please carefully read this: Approaching Mormon Doctrine - LDS Newsroom I don't typically worry a lot about stuff that isn't doctrine and doesn't make sense. There's far too much other stuff that is really, really awesome. The exception would be when enemies of the Church attack by using these things as a weapon. Say, the Adam-God teachings of Brigham Young. I did worry about that, but only because somebody thought it was a problem. It isn't, but I spent about 20 years figuring that out. But that's not my typical approach -- usually I just move on when I see something that doesn't make sense.

Originally Posted by AnthonyB

Of course the answer would be Jesus, who was fully God and fully man. However LDS don't appear to have a dual nature Christology and the idea of the limiting/masking divine nature by assuming manhood. Your Father God is permanently incarnate and simultaneously unlimitedly divine.

Oh sure we do. It's just not DOCTRINE. Heh. Interesting, isn't it? I love it. Think of the implications of what I've been saying about doctrine. There is a key hidden in there.

Remember that 99% of our doctrine, teachings and emphasis are on the eminent God. Yes, He of physical body. Sort of (read Joseph's King Follett Sermon to see what I mean by "sort of"). We are not like the Gnostics or even Creedal Christians, who ascribe to the belief that physicality cannot be sublime or perfect. We consider that to be a notion that does not describe things as they are. Mostly.

I do not believe that God is 'permanently incarnate', though I *never* speak of that in Church, because that view has to do with His transcendent nature. It is not a part of what the Church is about, even if it is true. Might seem complicated, but Heavenly Father is helping me through it.

I believe the Church is justified in this self-limitation of the view of God's nature, because of the mission of the Church. And the weakness of man. I see where it all fits very well. But I couldn't, without the guidance and inspiration that God has granted me. And I know because of this process, that *I* cannot teach it to another. And I'm not, I'm just telling you some of my thoughts.

Mystery, perplexity, enigma, cypher, parable, symbol, paradox. When the mind cannot describe, when the ineffable reveals itself to you, what do you do? You just go with it.

Let's take, as an example, Saul's conversion experience. Was God transcendent there? How about the stoning martyrdom of Stephen -- Was God transcendent, or immanent there? How about the mount of transfiguration? Did the Apostles REALLY see something there? There's plenty to contemplate.


HiJolly

[Islander]

It may be useful to consider that our expressions of the nature of God and Christ are but mere approximations of their reality. Language and insight have always been limited when it comes to articulating about divinity. We tend to discuss what seems more relevant, important and meaningful to us but it does not mean that other aspects of divinity and our relationship to it are less relevant.

It is interesting that in most direct reference to The Father in the NT, more specifically in Revelation, The Father does not move or speak. He is sitting on the throne but does not articulate.

Of God the Father we have but passing references, glances and a view that is oblique and at times out of reach. Not that it is so but that's how we experience it given the limited references. Jesus is much more real to us. He is unquestionably more tangible and close because of His role in salvation and the Atonement. Jesus is our foothold on the ladder to exaltation, as we can almost "see Him" on the dusty roads of the Holy Land follwed by the Apostles. We can also feel His embrace and comforting hand around our shoulders as we struggle with issues of mortality and obedience to His commandments.

It is not a rejection of the omnipresence of God the Father or lack of awareness of His transcendental nature. For most Latter-day Saints The Savior is "more real," closer, available, reachable and present in the scriptures and in our lives.

[mel6890]

1)Yes
2)Yes
3)Yes
4)Yes
5) B, but i don't really know what the creeds are, or at least i don't know it if i do so i think my answer doesn't really count

[LittleNipper]

I believe that it is about GOD becoming a human in order to save that which HE created and loved, rather than making humans gods. The key is that everything is all about GOD and HIS glory as opposed to what is in it for us as mere created beings.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by LittleNipper

I believe that it is about GOD becoming a human in order to save that which HE created and loved, rather than making humans gods. The key is that everything is all about GOD and HIS glory as opposed to what is in it for us as mere created beings.

Yes and now. The Glory and Honor be His forever and ever. We will worship our Lord, Savior and God for eternity. GOd-The-Father remains the absolute ruler of the universe. But his purpose or intent was to "—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man."

The Atonement was for us. He came to show us the way so that we may dwell with HIM and be with HIM.

"In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where cI am, there ye may be also.
And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know."


It is also clear from the text that our destiny is dictated by HIM and we are to sit with HIM on the right hand side of the Father. Most other Christians stop here. They do not want to think about what that means. It seems like it is blasphemy to ponder on what it implies. But it is written, for those that are faithful and true, that bare witness of the Christ and endure to the end we will access the kingdom of God and inherit it as the Apostle says:

"The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together."

There is nothing figurative in that statement.

[prisonchaplain]

Originally Posted by Islander

"The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together."

There is nothing figurative in that statement.

Your last line implies that we must interpret ourselves being the children of God in literal manner. If God the Father gave birth to us--if we are literally the stuff that He is--if we are the same species--then we are Gods. The New Agers are right.

On the other hand, it is not bizarre at all to understand "children of God," to mean tha we are eternal followers, worshipers, lovers of God, and that He will indeed exalt us to unknown greatness. There is no need to interpret "children of God" biologically, imho.

[LittleNipper]

The saved become glorified because of what GOD has done for them. GOD is glorified in spite of anything we may or not do. Glorification hinges on HIM and not anyone or anything else.