Trinity Questions

[Guest Mormon Mike]

Godrulz,

   Thank you for that post, it was very insightful, unfortunalty I see I have made a big mistake.  I decided to use my name Mormon Mike because I chat with it here often and have used it before in other chat rooms.  The problem is when people see my name they seek out information on the Mormon beliefs and they often come across misinformation and slander by those that oppose that religion.  It tends to cloud the discussion because I am then told what I believe by those that are assuming what they read about the Mormon church on some Anit-Mormon website is true.   I hope you can understand what I am saying, but again thanks for the post.  I am going to re-read it a few times and see if I can come up with some questions.

 Mike

[Guardiands]

Hello all,

I can't help but post a thing or two here.  To me it's quite simple.  Christians claim that the trinity is merely a summary of biblical data.  So great.  However, there seems to be a problem.  No where do I find in the bible that God and Jesus co-existed, are co substantial or are co-equal.  The bible does not even address two of these issues. (I know what you're thinking, God has been God from everlasting to everlasting, or for all eternity.  I strongly suggest in such cases you refer to the greek where you'll find a better transtlation is ages, olam and aion hebrew and greek respectively.  The jews understood eternity to consist of ages.  Hence from creation to ressurection.  To quote the evangelical chicago statement on biblical inerrancy "we only believe the bible to be infallible in what it affirms" no WHERE in the bible is the issue of BEFORE or AFTER eternity (olam and aion, AGES) addressed)

So since a summary can NOT introduce material not included in the main body, we can conclude that the creeds are NOT a summary, and thus are mere philosophies of men.

Once again co substantial, co eternal and co-equality of Christ and God the Father are NOT found in the bible.  And in fact, John 14:29 shows otherwise ,I did read the earlier explanation, and it was wonderful.  However, Jesus was both HUMAN and DIVINE, and he had to be FULLY divine, or else he could NOT do an infinite atonement.  So Jesus clearly WAS as divine as could be, yet STILL the Father is greater than Him. If you interpret John 14:29 to imply that Christ while on EARTH was in a lesser state than a divine being, HOW can you account for Him making an infinite atonement, which only a FULLY divine being could perform? (I believe the common phrase is 100% man and 100% God) Hence John 14:29 could ONLY refer to a form of stratification amoung the Godhead.

Now, What scripture can you show, in equally plain language, to show that they are co equal?

[linda7]

??? I have been following this thread and studying what everyone has posted and all I can say is that it remains very confusing as to what the truth is -confusion reigns

[Timothy]

Hi Linda,

Your confusion is likely due to the diversity of doctrines represented by the majority of the people responding.

BlindSeeker is 'Oneness' and does not believe in the Trinity.

kinnear is 'Church of God' and does not believe in the Trinity.

Mormon Mike is 'Mormon' and does not believe in the Trinity.

I have no idea what "Guardiands" beliefs are, but he apparently also does not believe in the Trinity.

Please don't attempt to formulate any doctrine from this thread.

[Dad Ernie]

Greetings Gardiand,

HOW can you account for Him making an infinite atonement, which only a FULLY divine being could perform?

The "infinite atonement" was made on the basis of Jesus being SINLESS. If you look at the requirements for the "sin offering" in the OT, you will find it must be "without blemish":

Leviticus 4:3 If the priest that is anointed do sin according to the sin of the people; then let him bring for his sin, which he hath sinned, a young bullock without blemish unto the LORD for a sin offering.

It was not based on His "divinity". However, that said, ONLY GOD IS GOOD, and Jesus made that statement to reveal He WAS the Father incarnate, and ONLY God is perfectly sinless. And He shall be called:

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Blessings,

Dad Ernie

[Guest Mormon Mike]

Timothy,

[Timothy]

Mike the bulk of contributions to this thread have been by persons who despise the Trinity. That was my point.

I haven't read each and every post, so I cannot give an opinion of how accurately the Trinity may have been expressed.

As for developing doctrine soley from what someone posts on a message board, yes, I feel that would be a reckless endeavor.

[Guest Mormon Mike]

Timothy,

   I hope you don

[Timothy]

Perhaps despise was out of order. Would disagree or oppose sound better?

Mike,

I have no reason to doubt your sincerity in wanting to learn about the Trinity. I think it's a wonderful thing. I also believe you have a serious question to ask of yourself, which is, are you prepared to abandon the LDS Church if you are compelled by the evidence (or revelation) you discover? I'm not trying to divert the topic here, but is your lack of understanding the Trinity, the only thing keeping you in the Mormon Church? Could you believe the Trinity and remain a Mormon?

I am more than willing ( I am compelled! ) to share with you whatever I can about my beliefs, but I first need you to answer the question I asked you several days ago.

[Guest Mormon Mike]

Timothy,