Trinity Proof-Texts Refuted

[AnthonyB]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

I find it quite interesting that some people who are under the impression that they believe in 'the Trinity' actually don't. What they believe in is three separate personages of the Godhead and they think this is what is meant by 'the Trinity'. I don't think that there are any scriptures which support the idea that three people can be one person in the very literal sense, any more than a man and wife when they marry can cease to be two separate individuals and yet they are declared to have become one.

Willow,

Sorry for the delay in respoding to this post, I wanted to wait until I had an answer to what LDS mean by "personage" on another thread. I think the concensus was that personage means important person. (Since LDS use it of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.) Certainly trinitarians think that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are persons, and since they are clearly important, under that definition, the term personage could be applied to them. In trinitarian thought therefore, the 3 personages are not believed to be 1 person but 1 being. The problem being that LDS seem not to be able to imagine or believe it possible for a single being to have multiplie personages. I think LDS reason that since all persons they have ever meet where 1 person in 1 being then that is the only type of being possible.

[JonboySquarepants]

hijolly, good for you! being born-again is great! lol, and you are right in that i don't think most mormons will think he did a good job. i'm curious about what you mean though when you say the three are one God. mormonism believes it is three Gods... you don't believe that? you believe that the three are one God and not three different Gods?
-----
about the book of mormon being full of errors. i didn't mean it IS full of errors, i'm saying it isn't. it's not a copy of a copy of a copy of a translation of a translation of a translation. it is supposed to be straight from God to j. smith. it is my understanding that when j. smith was reading the words out of his hat to his scribe, after they had written it correctly, that's when the next passage was made available to j. smith to read. i've heard it IS 'the word of God' and it IS 'the most correct book on the face of the earth,' since God directly translated it to j. smith... i would assume doctrinal errors were not made. i know punctuation, and grammar, and chapter/verse breaks were added in later copies of the book of mormon, but did the doctrine change? maybe, maybe not. that's not what i'm talking about. i'm simply saying that since the book of mormon is straight from God, and is the word of God, then we can read it and see what He really taught without going to other texts to check if we can find words that could be translated differently. it is correct; as is. so, when God says in the book of mormon that father, son, and holy ghost are one God... it means they are one God and not three Gods. and when the book of mormon says there is only one God it means there IS only one God and not more than one God. am i wrong in agreeing with the book of mormon?