one God

[rameumptom]

Given that just over 2 billion people are Trinitarians, I'd wager that the majority of them believe they are monotheists. Of course, that is based on the belief that they truly understand the Trinity, and not a form of modalism.

However, almost 4 billion people on earth are not Trinitarian. Of those, almost 1 billion Muslims would agree that the Trinity is polytheistic, as the Quran condemns the concept of making Jesus equal to God (they view him as a prophet only). Buddhists and Hindus that I've known would probably consider it polytheistic, albeit I have never formally inquired.

I suppose I would have to ask Elphaba and the other agnostics/atheists on the list their opinion on whether they see the Trinity as one or many gods/persons.

So, while the vast majority of the world may not view the Trinity as polytheistic, I would be surprised if at least half the world didn't consider it polytheistic. Having said that, what does it matter? Many Christians think Mormons worship Joseph Smith, but that doesn't make it true, either.

And I do not believe, as bytor, who seems to keep putting his foot in his mouth, that the Trinity was foisted upon anyone. I believe there was political intrigue and infighting during the Nicene Council, but that does not denote foisting it on anyone. Those who disagreed had the chance to start their own religions, as did Mohammed later on when he realized the Trinity was polytheistic.

[abqfriend]

Thank you for sharing your views.
It is not important to a Trinitarian Christian that a Buddhist, Hindu or Muslims consider that most Chrstians are polytheists.

That you and I hold different views on the Trinity or Godhead is our choice.
Ultimately--both views rest on faith.



-Carol

Originally Posted by rameumptom

Given that just over 2 billion people are Trinitarians, I'd wager that the majority of them believe they are monotheists. Of course, that is based on the belief that they truly understand the Trinity, and not a form of modalism.

However, almost 4 billion people on earth are not Trinitarian. Of those, almost 1 billion Muslims would agree that the Trinity is polytheistic, as the Quran condemns the concept of making Jesus equal to God (they view him as a prophet only). Buddhists and Hindus that I've known would probably consider it polytheistic, albeit I have never formally inquired.

I suppose I would have to ask Elphaba and the other agnostics/atheists on the list their opinion on whether they see the Trinity as one or many gods/persons.

So, while the vast majority of the world may not view the Trinity as polytheistic, I would be surprised if at least half the world didn't consider it polytheistic. Having said that, what does it matter? Many Christians think Mormons worship Joseph Smith, but that doesn't make it true, either.

And I do not believe, as bytor, who seems to keep putting his foot in his mouth, that the Trinity was foisted upon anyone. I believe there was political intrigue and infighting during the Nicene Council, but that does not denote foisting it on anyone. Those who disagreed had the chance to start their own religions, as did Mohammed later on when he realized the Trinity was polytheistic.

[bytor2112]

Originally Posted by abqfriend

Do not other religious traditions have value?

-I guess not-at least as your description of how the Trinity doctrine was "foisted" on Christians. Such a doctrine may not be a tenet of your faith-but it is of mine and millions of other Christians.

Please consider how you post things for us non -LDS members of this board-especially on this section-about learning about the Mormon Church.
-
Thank You.
Carol-a Catholic Investigator

Carol.....with all due respect, it was just a question and not a denunciation of anyone's faith tradition. Of course other religious traditions have value . I simply asked how Maureen knew it was true....how she personally discerned it. I was asking an honest question and hoping for a sincere reply. Please don't read more into the question than that. I am a convert to the LDS faith and once upon a time accepted the doctrine of the trinity as taught by orthodox christianity. I believed it....didn't understand it, but believed it because I was taught to believe it.

Maureen made the comment that millions accept the trinity doctrine because it is monotheistic.......I said how do you know it is not accepted because it has been passed down through the ages and taught as truth? In other words....if I were asked..."how do you know the LDS doctrine of the Godhead is true and not just some contrived story made up by Joseph Smith"........I would be able to answer the question and not take offense at the inquirers question.

[Maureen]

However, almost 4 billion people on earth are not Trinitarian. Of those, almost 1 billion Muslims would agree that the Trinity is polytheistic, as the Quran condemns the concept of making Jesus equal to God (they view him as a prophet only). Buddhists and Hindus that I've known would probably consider it polytheistic, albeit I have never formally inquired.

I barely know anything about what Muslims, Buddists and Hindus believe and I suspect that the majority of those faiths do not know what Christians believe and may possibly be indifferent to know. It can go both ways. If you suspect that Christians may not even understand their own doctrine of the Trinity, I really doubt you could imagine that the majority of those of other religions study and contemplate the Trinity extensively.

[bytor2112]

And I do not believe, as bytor, who seems to keep putting his foot in his mouth, that the Trinity was foisted upon anyone. I believe there was political intrigue and infighting during the Nicene Council, but that does not denote foisting it on anyone. Those who disagreed had the chance to start their own religions, as did Mohammed later on when he realized the Trinity was polytheistic

.

Foot in mouth?????!! How so? I asked Maureen a question regarding how she knew it because millions think it monotheistic and not just because it has been passed down as doctrinal truth. Everyone is sooooooo sensitive

Foist: 1. To pass off as genuine, valuable, or worthy

[rameumptom]

Bytor,

It is the terminology you are using. Terms like "foist" suggest something illegitimate that is passed on. IOW, you are undermining your own intent by using explosive terms.

I don't think you meant it, but it basically is putting one's foot in one's mouth, when we say/write something that has other connotations to the listener/reader.

[BenRaines]

Bytor, your definition is correct. "To pass off". It is not actually genuine, valuable or worthy. That is what foist means.

Sounds like a misunderstanding to me. If I understand.

Ben Raines

[bytor2112]

So your saying.....that if I would have wrote "taught to" rather than "foisted on" my mouth would be clear of my foot ? Well maybe......but either way it was a sincere inquiry and worded to evoke a bit of thought as to why it is accepted.....I didn't think it would be an "explosive" word. The question asked is "how do you know it was not something "foisted".....illegimately passed on.....exactly. It wasn't an accusation...it was a question....how do you know it wasn't something illegitimately passed on. Still haven't been answered.........

Bytor,

If you need any help with these LDS people, just let me know and I will jump in.

God bless,

Carl ( a monotheistic trinitarian )

[rameumptom]

Ceeboo, are you trying to foist yourself onto the rest of us, or just on Bytor?

I've found words to be very stimulating, but very dangerous. An old Benny Hill comedy routine has a young man and woman quietly talking, and she says, "what is this thing called, love?"

The producer of the film they are making comes storming in and says, "No, no, NO! It isn't 'what is this thing called, love?' It is: 'what is this thing called love?'"

The intonation of a single comma can make it entirely different.