In an October (2014) blog, Latter-day Saint Greg Trimble sought to explain “Why Mormons Don’t Believe In the Trinity.” As Mr. Trimble pointed out, it is imperative that we “know who and what God is,” for Jesus said, “And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (John 17:3).
From there Mr. Trimble launched into the meat of his article – the specific reasons why Mormons don’t believe in the Trinitarian (Christian) God.
From what he’s written (in both parts 1 and 2 of this essay), this is my conclusion: The reasons Mormons don’t believe in the Trinity are these:
- They don’t know what the doctrine of the Trinity actually is
- They don’t know what really happened at the Council of Nicea
- They don’t know what the Bible says about God
- They don’t believe that Jesus built an indestructible church
- They don’t understand the Athanasian Creed
We have presented information on the doctrine of the Trinity and the Council of Nicea before on Mormon Coffee; so if you need to familiarize yourself with the definition, facts and biblical support for the Christian Trinitarian God, please see those articles (parts 1, 2, 3 and 4). To see how Greg Trimble led me to my conclusion on why Mormons don’t believe in the Trinity, read on.
- They don’t know what the doctrine of the Trinity actually is. As demonstrated by Mr. Trimble:
“I decided I wanted to see for myself whether Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost were one being ‘manifesting’ Himself in three different persons.”
- They don’t know what really happened at the Council of Nicea. As demonstrated by Mr. Trimble:
“These politicians and a few clergymen voted on how to define God at Nicea and it became later known as the Athanasian creed. The council was a debate between essentially two men; Arius and Athanasius. Arius believed that The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost were separate entities, of one mind, but individuals nonetheless. Athanasius believed that the three were ‘of one substance’. Athanasius was more vocal, more convincing, and had more friends. He won the vote and Arius was cast out as a heretic.”
- They don’t know what the Bible says about God. As demonstrated by Mr. Trimble:
“Why does all of Christendom say that Mormons don’t worship the correct Jesus or believe the Bible when they themselves are basing their entire belief in God not on the Bible but on a creed that was pieced together by the Roman pagans and politicians of the 4th century? I never heard Peter or Paul or John or Christ or anyone else in the New Testament talk about the trinity.”
- They don’t believe that Jesus built an indestructible church. As demonstrated by Mr. Trimble:
“I wonder if Paul had some of the same thoughts I’m having when he cruised into Athens and saw an inscription on an altar that said ‘TO THE UNKNOWN GOD’. He was horrified! An unknown God?! The rest of the apostles were horrified at the thought as well. They were watching the true understanding of the nature and character of God slip away right before their eyes, and they knew the impact it would have on the Church. By the end of the first century…no one had a clue.”
- They don’t understand the Athanasian Creed. As demonstrated by Mr. Trimble:
“Now this is where it gets really strange. Protestants seem to be the most vocal against Mormons for not believing in the trinitarian creeds. But check out the first sentence of the Athanasian creed! ‘Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith.’ Geeee. So…since all other Christian reformers came out of the Catholic Church…it’s hard to believe there are so many protestants that would hold that creed so dear to their hearts…even dear enough that they would send Mormons out of Christianity just for not believing it. That creed just told them that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church!”
Mr. Trimble (and other Mormons) exhibits a grave lack of understanding regarding the biblical, Christian doctrine of the Trinity. And no wonder. Misunderstanding of this doctrine has been perpetuated throughout Mormonism by all sorts of Church authorities, from prophets to ordinary elders, from Joseph Smith’s day to contemporary times.
“Many men say there is one God; the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are only one God! I say that is a strange God anyhow—three in one, and one in three! It is a curious organization… All are to be crammed into one God, according to sectarianism. It would make the biggest God in all the world. He would be a wonderfully big God —he would be a giant or a monster” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 372. Ellipses mine).
“The world wrestles with the question of who God is, and in what form He is found. Some say that the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost are one. I wonder how they ever arrive at that. How could Jesus have prayed to Himself when he uttered the Lord’s Prayer? How could He have met with Himself when He was on the Mount of Transfiguration? No. He is a separate being. God, our Father, is one. Jesus Christ is two. The Holy Ghost is three. And these three are united in purpose and in working together to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.” (Church News, 7/4/1998, 2)
“THE TRINITY CREATION. They believe in the trinity creation. The trinity was voted on in the Council of Nicene hundreds of years after Christ’s death. A bunch of church leaders and government officials got together and voted on ‘who God was?’, and it wasn’t even a unanimous vote. There were about four different versions of God that they voted on. The version that is used by Catholics and Protestants today only won by about a 40 percent margin. Their view of God, as you may know, is that He is like a formless mass of spirit that fills the whole universe and when He comes to earth, part of it breaks off and forms itself into Jesus” (Scott Marshall, Tracting and Member Missionary Work, p. 73).
I confess: Like Mormons, I do not believe in that misconceived idea of the trinity, either. But the biblical doctrine — that is, “Within the one Being that is God, there eternally exists three coequal and coeternal Persons, namely, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit” — that doctrine of the Trinity I believe. That describes the God I know and worship, and in whom I have eternal life (John 17:3).
My reaction to Mr. Trimble is, “Man is this guy ignorant!” He sounds childish and like someone who hasn’t spend any time at all studying early Church history or reading what the Church Fathers wrote regarding the nature of God. But then Joseph Smith was the same type, working on mysteries without any clues.
Most revealing to me was this from Trimble:
“These politicians and a few clergymen voted on how to define God at Nicea and it became later known as the Athanasian creed.”
Trimble has no idea who was at Nicea and what the process was that led the participants to define clearly the doctrine of the nature of God.
I think the point of Sharon’s article is the ignorance of heretical and abberant sects regarding the doctrine of the Trinity. This ignorance is not only what the doctrine actually is, but how it came to be that the Church felt the need to clearly define the nature of God.
As a replacement doctrine of the nature of God, the LDS offers us a polytheistic view of the “gods” with men becoming gods in accordance to some universal principle. And asked what their support for such a notion of men becoming gods, procreating spirit offspring with their goddess wives and ruling their own planetary system is, they give us “revelation” from a man who had a magic rock.
The LDS view of the nature of God isn’t even good heresy.
I can’t believe this guy wrote an article that exposes how totally uninformed he is!
But wait! Who is his audience; the people he is writing to? He’s writing to/for folks who are as uninformed and ignorant as he is. The chances of any of the readers actually looking into this topic is about zilch.
We know the LDS mantra, don’t we? “Follow the leaders they will never lead you astray.” It’s twin is, “When the leaders speak, the thinking is done. So the LDS members basically outsource their thinking to those who are in leadership positions in the LDS church. Now put that together with the fact that LDS folks are trained to discern truth based on how you feel and you have a real formula for disaster.
Joseph Smith told people that God told him that the Creeds of Christendom were an abomination. That’s the premise on which Smith founded his church. So a person, in order to accept Smith’s premise, has to believe that God the Father appeared to him. But I think Smith made a major blunder here because he said that he was directed to “restore” first century Christianity. What do we know about this? Smith’s creation and the gods he eventually ended up with, bear no resemblance to the first century Church. Not only that but we don’t see Smith’s doctrine of the nature of God any where in the Bible, in the writings of the Church Fathers or even the heretics.
LDS folks need to wise up. You’ve been had!
“It would make the biggest God in all the world. He would be a wonderfully big God —he would be a giant or a monster.”
I love this quote. It made me laugh.
But the Trinity is easy to misunderstand, but vital.
I don’t know what’s so hard to understand about the Trinity. There is One God, three persons, not three gods.
The Jews were monotheists. That was the point of God’s revelation to them.
I know that this is an imperfect example but we have one government in our country. Not three. It consists of three co-equal branches, the executive, the legislative and the judiciary. That’s not three governments, but one.
So some of the cults will say, “OK, when Jesus was praying to the Father, was He praying to Himself?” No, He was praying to the Father. When Jesus said He would send the “Helper” the Spirit of truth who would lead the disciples to all truth who was Jesus talking about? He was talking about the Holy Spirit.
One God. Three persons who make-up the God-Head. I hope I haven’t presented heresy here!
Falcon, I would answer that in your example, the Prez can lead the nation by himself without a judiciary and without a legislature (some might think our current prez would like that situation), meaning the judges and the congress are essentially superfluous and unnecessary. That’s not the case with God, as God is not God without Christ or the Spirit.
And while it is true that when Christ prayed to the Father, he was praying to a separate being, its also true that he was praying to himself. At Christmas, Christians say that God took the form of man and was born on Christmas to save us all.
I actually do agree that the basic concept of the Trinity is simple: One God manifest in three persons. Its in the parsing of that concept where it becomes difficult. Its been discussed since the beginning, and we won’t solve it here. People have had trouble with it since before Christ died on the Cross. Its what set the Pharisees in a tizzy: Jesus claimed to be the very God of the Old Testament.
I happen to think the Trinity is one of those things that becomes clear as assumptions change, but for those who do not share our assumptions of God, it can be a very difficult concept to accept.
Sharon, great summation of Mr. Trimble’s article . He truly is confused , it’s amazing at the number of false assumptions he made .
Right at beginning he finds that when Christians say that God is ” incomprehensible ” or a “mystery” that is just a copout type of response . Is Mr Trimble trying to suggest that when people can’t give him a good definition of the Trinity but simply say that God is incompresensible therefore that proves the Trinity is a false doctrine ? It appears that is what he infers. Like other false prophets in our day , Mormon prophets come along with a great salesmanship , they claim to have the inside information about our Creator , they make Him ” reasonable” to understand . He’s only a man
who became Almighty God , Thomas Monson will be just like Him one day ! No wonder why Mormons reject the Trinity , it’s easier to make God into our image —Rom 1:23. May the Mormon people read the Bible and see how great , and yes , incomprehensible , our Creator is . Psalms 145:3 as well as Psalms 147 and 148 is but a small sampling of what God’s prophets wrote of Him .
Mormons like Mr Trimble may want to take notice of the fact that even their own church manual
( 1960 Melchizedek Priesthood course of study ) says about some other Biblical doctrines such as
the atonement and the resurrection of Jesus :
” These are certainly mysteries because they go beyond the comprehension of the finite mind to
fathom their full implication as well as their possibility . ” ( p 42 ) .
Christians believe the Trinity because the Bible reveals this information about God . In no way will anyone be able to fully understand it because our Creator is that big and majestic , but this does not cause us to reject the Trinity , on the contrary we rejoice how far beyond us He truly is . Job 11:7, 8
Actually, I don’t wholeheartedly follow the Athanasian creed. I believe it doesn’t actually follow the rules of sola scriptura and the Athanasian creed is found nowhere in the Bible, that is in terms of its content.
The authorship is disputed, as is its origins.
Meanwhile, in terms of the Trinity, while the word Trinity is not mentioned in the Bible, the concept is.
The Trinity is both easy and difficult to understand. It’s difficult because once you compare it to something, (e.g., “the Trinity is like X…”) the similarities will only go so far before they break down and fall into heresy. But it’s simple to describe: one essence, three persons, without dividing the persons to be three essences, without uniting the essence to be one person. A child can understand that, and yet the most learned of men can meditate on it their whole life. St Augustine had a similar realization with his contemplation on time: “For what is time? Who can easily and briefly explain it? … If no one ask of me, I know; if I wish to explain to him who asks, I know not.”
Rikkij, it’s plain that Mormons think we put much more importance on the Athanasian creed , or Nicene creed than we actually do . Mormons like Mr Trimble have to do this because it is easier for
them to refute our beliefs . Did you notice how he used the word ” catholic ” and what he assumed it meant ?
We don’t believe the early creeds were inspired and scripture . Mormons however have a creed among their Standard Works , it’s their Articles of Faith .
Was this article by Mr Trimble something confirmed by his inner witness ? If not should we take him serious ? One thing’s for sure , he needs to discover that Mormonism is not the answer .
That’s are hope for him .
And I don’t believe in the Trinity because of the Nicene Creed, the Athanasian Creed, or any other doctrinal confession. I believe it because the Bible teaches it, and therefore so did the ancient church. A creed is nothing more than a way to condense a thousand verses into a dozen lines in a systematic and coherent manner. A baptist would never say that their doctrinal confession (BF&M) is unerring or infallible, they would simply say that it is an articulation of what the Bible teaches. Each line of the BF&M is backed up with several verses from the Bible. That’s all that any Christian doctrinal confession is, a condensed and convenient symbol of the faith. The word “creed” has a lot of unnecessary negative baggage associated with it, but that just comes from those who are ignorant of a what a creed really is. Creeds were constructed when needed to be a very easy solution to a very real problem, and is it no wonder that the heretics are the ones who complain, “Why do keep coming at me with all this DOCTRINE?!” It’s because that “Doctrine” articulated from the Scriptures is what condemns them as the liars and sinners they are. Heretics want Christian doctrine to not be nailed down, that way they can spread their lies without opposition. If I were a heretic I would hate doctrinal confessions, too.
The whole purpose for the creeds was to combat heresy. Creeds aren’t meant to be inspired in the same sense that scripture is inspired. The heretics did the early Church a great service because they forced the Church to clearly define and delineate the basic doctrines of the Church.
Issue 85 of Christian History magazine is a great primer on the topic of the early church and the various councils and what was accomplished at each.
For example this excerpt:
“The Council of Nicaea is often misrepresent. Jehovah”s Witnesses and modern critics of the divinity of Christ allege that the council was merely a tool of imperial manipulation. They point to Nicaea, not the Bible, as the source of the doctrine of the Trinity, and interpret the council as the triumph of heresy over orthodoxy, rather than the reverse. They argue that Emperor Constantine ‘forced’ the Council to adopt the crucial word consubstantial (homoousios) to describe the equal divinity of the Father and the Son”.
“But did Constantine really run the show at Nicaea? The relationship between the church and the emperors starting with Constantine to the end of the Roman Empire in the East worked much like a marriage……When it came to matters of faith, however, the boundaries of their relationship left no uncertainty about where the power of one left off and the other began.”
The point is that in matters of faith it was the bishops who were in charge. The councils were viewed as Spirit-inspired events, not as legal institutions that would guarantee the truthfulness of their decisions. This view limited imperial power.
One of my absolute favorite books is “Knowledge of the Holy” by A. W. Tozer. It is a great Biblical explanation of the characteristics of God. It’s a book that will change your life and help you obtain a correct view of who God is. Below is a quote from the book that helps explain why we can apprehend who God is, yet we will never fully comprehend everything about God.
“When we try to imagine what God is like we must of necessity use that-which-is-not-God as the raw material for our minds to work on; hence whatever we visualize God to be, He is not, for we have constructed our image out of that which He has made and what He has made is not God. If we insist upon trying to imagine Him, we end with an idol, made not with hands but with thoughts; and an idol of the mind is as offensive to God as an idol of the hand. “The intellect knoweth that it is ignorant of Thee,” said Nicholas of Cusa, “because it knoweth Thou canst not be known, unless the unknowable could be known, and the invisible beheld, and the inaccessible attained.” “If anyone should set forth any concept by which Thou canst be conceived,” says Nicholas again, “I know that that concept is not a concept of Thee, for every concept is ended in the wall of Paradise…. So too, if any were to tell of the understanding of Thee, wishing to supply a means whereby Thou mightest be understood, this man is yet far from Thee…. forasmuch as Thou art absolute above all the concepts which any man can frame.” Left to ourselves we tend immediately to reduce God to manageable terms. We want to get Him where we can use Him, or at least know where He is when we need Him. We want a God we can in some measure control. We need the feeling of security that comes from knowing what God is like, and what He is like is of course a composite of all the religious pictures we have seen, all the best people we have known or heard about, and all the sublime ideas we have entertained. If all this sounds strange to modern ears, it is only because we have for a full half century taken God for granted. The glory of God has not been revealed to this generation of men. The God of contemporary Christianity is only slightly superior to the gods of Greece and Rome, if indeed He is not actually inferior to them in that He is weak and helpless while they at least had power. If what we conceive God to be He is not, how then shall we think of Him? If He is indeed incomprehensible, as the Creed declares Him to be, and unapproachable, as Paul says He is, how can we Christians satisfy our longing after Him? The hopeful words, “Acquaint now thyself with him, and be at peace,” still stand after the passing of the centuries; but how shall we acquaint ourselves with One who eludes all the straining efforts of mind and heart? And how shall we be held accountable to know what cannot be known? “Canst thou by searching find out God?” asks Zophar the Naamathite; “canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection? It is high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know?” “Neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son,” said our Lord, “and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.” The Gospel according to John reveals the helplessness of the human mind before the great Mystery which is God, and Paul in First Corinthians teaches that God can be known only as the Holy Spirit performs in the seeking heart an act of self-disclosure. The yearning to know What cannot be known, to comprehend the Incomprehensible, to touch and taste the Unapproachable, arises from the image of God in the nature of man. Deep calleth unto deep, and though polluted and landlocked by the mighty disaster theologians call the Fall, the soul senses its origin and longs to return to its Source. How can this be realized? The answer of the Bible is simply “through Jesus Christ our Lord.” In Christ and by Christ, God effects complete self-disclosure, although He shows Himself not to reason but to faith and love. Faith is an organ of knowledge, and love an organ of experience. God came to us in the incarnation; in atonement He reconciled us to Himself, and by faith and love we enter and lay hold on Him.”Verily God is of infinite greatness,” says Christ’s enraptured troubadour, Richard Rolle; “more than we can think; … unknowable by created things; and can never be comprehended by us as He is in Himself. But even here and now, whenever the heart begins to burn with a desire for God, she is made able to receive the uncreated light and, inspired and fulfilled by the gifts of the Holy Ghost, she tastes the joys of heaven. She transcends all visible things and is raised to the sweetness of eternal life…. Herein truly is perfect love; when all the intent of the mind, all the secret working of the heart, is lifted up into the love of God.”‘ That God can be known by the soul in tender personal experience while remaining infinitely aloof from the curious eyes of reason constitutes a paradox best described as Darkness to the intellect But sunshine to the heart.”
concerning Sharon’s # 4 above , i.e. that Mormons like Mr Trimble don’t believe that Jesus built an indestructible church .This is another example of why people should dismiss Mormonism’s claim
of authority because sincere people like Mr Trimble have been fooled by the latter days false prophets who run the Mormon church . Few issues reflect the error of Mormonism more than what Mormon authorities have taught about the alleged complete apostasy which happened soon after the deaths of Jesus’ apostles : supposedly the church died off and the gospel of salvation ( Rom 1:16 ) became corrupted/ altered because man made teachings had become mixed into it thus rendering it powerless to save . Thus salvation was not available to mankind on earth for 1700 years until Joseph Smith arrived on the scene and restored it . That’s the Mormon belief . It is a lie , the New Testament teaches no such thing .
That one doctrine is enough to dismiss Mormonism . The vast majority of Mormons are a kind and decent people who have sadly been detoured from the truth by men who have cleverly mimicked Jesus’ true apostles authority and thus fooled sincere people into following them and believing their false teachings . This is not a new problem . 2 Cor 11:13 ; Rev 2:2
We pray for Mr Trimble and the Mormon people to realize that Mormonism is not the answer .
@Mike R, Falcon
Point taken. And MRM is correct in its stance. The Trinity as a concept is accurate and the so called Athanasian Creed is also correct in terms of being accurate in representing Biblical correct theology.
I just personally have a problem with the obscure authorship and origins of this particular creed. I can’t say I have an issue with the Nicene Creed (2nd Council). Just my thoughts.
And you’re right, Mr. Thimble constructs many a straw man in an effort to undermine the true doctrines of the churches of Christ.
@Mike R, Falcon
Point taken. And MRM is correct in its stance. The Trinity as a concept is accurate and the so called Athanasian Creed is also correct in terms of being accurate in representing Biblically correct theology.
I just personally have a problem with the obscure authorship and origins of this particular creed. I can’t say I have an issue with the Nicene Creed (2nd Council). Just my thoughts.
And you’re right, Mr. Thimble constructs many a straw man in an effort to undermine the true doctrines of the churches of Christ.
Once a year at Church we recite the Athanasian Creed. Wow! This Mormon writer actually believes that we recite something that condemns us as Lutherans outside the Roman Church. Yes, this is ignorance.
For those interested, here is a link to the Athanasian creed. It is in the Book of Concord which prescribes the Biblical beliefs of the Lutheran faith:
http://bookofconcord.org/creeds.php#athanasian
I also think it’s funny how Greg associated the word Catholic with the Roman Catholic Church. The phrase “catholic church,” does not refer to the Roman Catholic Church. The word catholic means “universal.” The true “catholic” church is all those who have placed their faith in Jesus Christ for salvation. Unfortunately Greg is like many other Mormons who make comments and accusations without ever really doing their own research. Most Mormons confuse the doctrine of the Trinity withe Modalism.
Joseph said “If you don’t comprehend the character of God, then you don’t comprehend yourself.” …and then he went on to create his god in the false image of fallen man which is a perception of being autonomous self existent individual , rather than how we truly are, which is having our being IN GOD. This guy mentions the uknown god, but forgets to show that the apostles then proclaimed that God to them saying –
Acts 17:24 – God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
I have heard mormons quote this, as proof of us being spirit children of heavenly father, but I have no idea how they can possible understand it seeing as how it has nothing to do with their idea of god and everything to do with the trinity. We become offspring/children of God when we partake of his nature, and are born of the spirit. In a sense our God is the father of everything since even cows and trees have their being in him, but its humans that can have a father/child relationship with him.
Romans 8:15
For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
Mormons have separated god into a multiplicity of autonomous individuals, which is the antithetical to true personhood.
What’s most striking about the assertions by the author in question is how wildly off his assertions are concerning the Trinity. Asserting the “catholic” faith is perhaps his most egregious error, given how obvious it is to determine that the term ‘catholic’ was used not to refer to the Pope’s church in Rome, but the general Christian church.
What’s most appalling is that Mr. Trinble’s beliefs seem to be rather common among Mormon folk.
Might the old saying “……the blind leading the blind” apply here.
The rank-and-file LDS member merely repeats what they’ve been told. In this case, Trimble’s article ranks right up there with “The Bible has been copied so many times that the text has been corrupted and can’t be trusted.” Another of my LDS conspiracy favorites? “Medieval monks left all of the Mormonism out of the Bible.”
Mormons are among the absolute worst at Christian history and Biblical interpretation. It’s amazing that in this day when so much evidence is available to debunk Mormonism, that these people still buy into the fantasy.
I guess if something makes you feel good, who cares about actually facts and evidence.
History gets more interesting the further back you go. If you look at the secular history of how the trinity came to be you might be saddened. If you have the power to squash all other beliefs and do so you are then locked into a belief that may be wrong. In the book A.D. 381 the author Charles Freemen points out that from 320 to 390 A.D. that religious tolerance went from being acceptable to not. The Emperor Theodosius in 380 A.D. issued an edict that says:
It is our will that all peoples ruled by the administration of our clemency shall practice that religion which the divine Peter the apostle transmitted to the romans…this is the religion followed by bishop Damasus of Rome and by Peter, bishop of Alexandria, a man of apostolic sanctity: that is according to the apostolic discipline of the evangelical doctrine, we shall believe in the single deity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost under the concept of equal majesty and of the Holy Trinity.
We command that persons that follow this rule shall embrace the name of catholic Christians. The rest ,however, whom we judge demented and insane, shall carry the infamy of heretical dogmas. Their meeting places shall not receive the name of churches, and they shall be smitten first by Divine vengeance, and secondly by the retribution of hostility which We shall assume in accordance with the Divine judgement.
When the power of the secular government is behind you and you have the power to eliminate all other ideas you lose in a way freedom of speech.
I am neither demented or insane. I do not believe the doctrine of the trinity is true but there is something true in it. I find it odd that you use John 17:3 because that to me is a good subordinationist verse but you may not see it that way.
The successful false prophets these days are the ones who have a similar advertisement : they have been appointed by God to reveal the real truth about Him or salvation because all other churches / followers of Jesus are in the dark about God ‘s / Jesus’ true identity having been deceived by men . Mormon leaders are one example of such prophets , and they have made it known that only they can offer salvation to mankind . Some Mormon leaders have thus declared that Mormons are the only true christians/ worshipers of Jesus in the only true church of Jesus and with the only true gospel of salvation . All others constitute part of what is considered the church of the Devil in these days .
That’s what Mr Trimble’s leaders have taught about us and non Mormons . But we expect that type of teaching from latter days false prophets —Matt 24:11 .
Mr Trimble says that since he can’t find anyone that can explain the Trinity to him to his satisfaction then that proves to him that this doctrine should not be a factor in determining if he is christian .
He cites Jn 17:3 and is correct in seeing the importance of knowing who God is , salvation is at stake according to that scripture verse . That also agrees with what church curriculum has stated :
” Your objective is to seek to understand the nature and kind of being that God is in order that
you may ‘ exercise faith in God unto life and salvation ‘ and worship Him in spirit and truth .”
[ 1974-75 Study Guide for the Melchizedek Priesthood Quorums , p. 58 ] .
So Mormonism says that a correct understanding of God is a requirement for salvation , and so we find ” ….that Joseph Smith and his successors are the revealers of the knowledge of Christ and of
salvation for our day ….” [ Ensign Nov 1974 p. 35 sermon by Elder Bruce McConkie ] .
Now we need to see what Mormon leaders have taught about God . What have they declared about God ? A Trinity ? Yes , they have offered a Trinity in place of the one stated in the early creeds .
Mormon leader Charles Penrose testified that Mormonism offers ” the true trinity ” [ Why I Am A
Mormon , p. 8 ] , and Elder Hugh B. Brown preached at Gen Conference :
” … but we repeat , we are Christian , we believe in the Holy Trinity , Father , Son , and Holy Ghost …
..” [ Conf . Report , April 1958 , p. 106 ]
So what is Mormonism’s Holy Trinity according to Mormon leaders ? A short answer :
According to Mormon leaders ” the true trinity ” consists of 3 males in heaven who form a council
of three Gods , neither of whom have always been a God , and each of whom was schooled by a God who was higher and with more dominion than them , to eventually qualify to become a God themselves and rule over mankind . There’s also a Goddess(s) who plays an integral part in all
this .
Mormon leaders drifted from teaching the Father , Son , and Holy Ghost is one God into the
egregious doctrine of three Gods . The Bible’s prophets / apostles did not do this , neither is this
found in the Book of Mormon ( 2Nephi 31:21 ) . After Mormon leaders succumbed to believing in Gods they proceeded to drift even further from the Bible teaching about God . The above teaching
about their Trinity is a small sample — Brigham Young even incorporated into the temple ceremony mention of the three Gods who created this earth as Eloheim , Jehovah , and Michael.
One thing’s for sure : accepting Mormon leaders to be reliable guides in understanding scriptural truths is not a wise decision . Fact of matter is that Mormon leaders simply are the pot calling the
kettle black , when they say the Trinity of the early Creeds is a man made invention .
Mr Trimble can be free from following false prophets of the latter days . We get to pray for him to
discover new life in Jesus Christ . He deserves to know about true freedom .
clyde,
Does what you say make the doctrine of the Trinity any less true?
clyde,
Can I play Mormon with you? Here goes.
*God used the Emperor to proclaim this doctrine revealing His nature as the standard for the Christian faith. Even though this was civil authority, God used it for His good purpose.
What do you think folks. Is that pretty good Mormon thinking on the falcon’s part. What follows demonstrates that the Emperor was sincere. It makes me feel good when I read it. Therefore it’s true!
“……………………..Constantine collected himself, and speaking in Latin, which was still the language of the court, in a voice that seemed strangely soft and gentle for a man so commanding, he bade the bishops remember that it was the power of God that had dethroned the tyrants, and worse than any battlefield was a civil war between factions of the church.”
It is my desire,” he said, “that you should meet together in a general council, and so I offer to the King of All my gratitude for this mercy that has come to me above my other mercies-I mean that there has been granted to me the benefit of seeing you assembled together and to know you are resolved to be in common harmony together.”
………”When I gained my victories over my enemies, I thought nothing remained for me but to give thanks unto God and to rejoice with those who have been delivered by me. But when I learned, contrary to all expectations, that there were divisions among you, then I solemnly considered them, and praying that these discords might also be healed with my assistance, I summoned you here without delay. I rejoice to see you here, yet I should be more pleased to see unity and affection among you. I entreat you, therefore, beloved ministers of God, to remove the causes of dissension among you and to establish peace.”
(Christian History; Issue51, Vol.XV, No 3 p.15)
This is from the “Doctrine” of the original 1835 Doctrine & Covenants until it was removed in 1921:
[Lec 5:1c] We shall in this lecture speak of the Godhead; we mean the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
[Lec 5:2a] There are two personages who constitute the great, matchless, governing, and supreme power over all things – by whom all things were created and made that are created and made, whether visible or invisible;
[Lec 5:2b] whether in heaven, on earth, or in the earth, under the earth, or throughout the immensity of space.
[Lec 5:2c] They are the Father and the Son: The Father being a personage of spirit, glory, and power, possessing all perfection and fullness.
[Lec 5:2d] The Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, a personage of tabernacle, made or fashioned like unto man, or being in the form and likeness of man – or rather, man was formed after his likeness and in his image.
[Lec 5:2e] He is also the express image and likeness of the personage of the Father, possessing all the fullness of the Father, or the same fullness with the Father, being begotten of him;
[Lec 5:2f] and was ordained from before the foundation of the world to be a propitiation for the sins of all those who should believe on his name;
[Lec 5:2g] and is called the Son because of the flesh – and descended in suffering below that which man can suffer, or in other words, suffered greater sufferings, and was exposed to more powerful contradictions than any man can be.
[Lec 5:2h] But notwithstanding all this, he kept the law of God and remained without sin; showing thereby that it is in the power of man to keep the law and remain also without sin.
[Lec 5:2i] And also, that by him a righteous judgment might come upon all flesh, and that all who walk not in the law of God, may justly be condemned by the law, and have no excuse for their sins.
[Lec 5:2j] And he being the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth, and having overcome, received a fullness of the glory of the Father – possessing the same mind with the Father;
[Lec 5:2k] which Mind is the Holy Spirit, that bears record of the Father and the Son;
[Lec 5:2L] and these three are one, or in other words, these three constitute the great, matchless, governing, and supreme power over all things; by whom all things were created and made, that were created and made:
[Lec 5:2m] and these three constitute the Godhead and are one: the Father and the Son possessing the same mind, the same wisdom, glory, power, and fullness;
[Lec 5:2n] filling all in all -the Son being filled with the fullness of the Mind, glory, and power; or in other words the Spirit, glory, and power of the Father – possessing all knowledge and glory, and the same kingdom;
[Lec 5:2o] sitting at the right hand of power, in the express image and likeness of the Father – a Mediator for man – being filled with the fullness of the Mind of the Father, or in other words, the Spirit of the Father;
Notice how different this is compared to what LDS theology is now?
In your last two paragraphs if this was Constantine talking he was still a pagan and was not talking to the right God. I think that would be your thinking not mine. Later under Theodosius and the enperors’ that followed religious tolerance was Gone. No pagan temples no Arian churches or any other sects existed.
There are three things we can look at with the trinity. It is completely false, it is absolutely true, or something in between. I believe in the in between.
It would probably be better to look at people to find God. You, falcon, mentioned on this blog what you did for a living I can’t remember what it was but it made fell bad for calling you Torquemada. I want to wish you and everybody else a happy holiday season.
clyde,
Well I, as usual, have no idea what you’re talking about. I don’t recall you labeling me “Torquemada” whatever that is. But I accept your sort of apology if that’s what it was. Actually I’m retired, but still continue to consult in various educational settings.
You wrote:
“In your last two paragraphs if this was Constantine talking he was still a pagan and was not talking to the right God.”
How do you conclude that?
If you’re LDS, you don’t believe “in-between”. Please clearly articulate what you believe regarding the nature of god. The LDS subscribe to the Arian heresy that Jesus is a created being. You know the LDS drill clyde. Jesus is the spirit off-spring of the Mormon god and one of his many wives who live on or near the planet Kolob. How’s that “in-between”?
Clyde seems to be doing a typical Mormon response in that he offers enough fact to sound conclusive but grossly misses the point by fully misunderstanding the rest.
Clyde, you think that since persecutions , and atrocities were done by men who believed in the Trinity that therefore the Trinity is a false doctrine ? That type of rationale is truly ” out there” . Sorry to see that you can’t seem to reason properly . We keep hoping that you will come to find out that Mormonism is not the answer . You deserve to know the truth about God , and we will continue to remind you of that fact .
Hope you and your family have a nice holiday season .
Mr. Trimble asks why does ” Christendom ” say that Mormons don’t worship the correct Jesus ?
Well, if Mormons believe the teachings about Jesus that have come from their leaders than those Mormons do indeed believe in a Jesus which is a counterfeit . Can sincere well meaning people be fooled by men who claim to be God’s spokesmen today ? Well, can people be fooled by doctors , or professional car salesmen ? It happens all the time to decent people who take these authority type persons word for it , etc.
In the fashion industry , there are millions and millions of dollars lost because of what is known as
“knock offs ” — counterfeits . By attaching a well known and famous name onto clothes it successfully
fools shoppers . Those who look beyond the label , the famous name and examine closely how the item is constructed discover it’s true identity and thus avoid being fooled by a good counterfeit .
People who accept the Jesus of Mormonism have similarly been fooled by a knock off — what Paul called ” another Jesus ” in 2Cor 11:4 . Mormons have bought the Jesus their leaders have sold them because the right name / title is used . But to those who take the time to closely examine what Mormon leaders have taught about Jesus Christ they soon discover the Mormon Jesus to be a good counterfeit .
This same type of error happens with sincere people read Mormon P.R. materials or talk with Mormon missionaries about God and accept what they say as truth without closely examining it .
The Mormon Jesus : the first child in heaven that a male God and one of His Goddess wives produced , this child had brothers and sisters , one of his brothers was called Lucifer . When this first born child had been schooled enough he was eventually became a God and would be known as Jehovah and He would be allowed to rule with His Father and another brother in a trinity of Gods .
He would eventually be picked to come to earth and become a human , His name would be called Jesus .
The Bible knows no such Jesus . The Bible is clear about Jehovah and He is not one God among many in heaven , sexually produced by a God and Goddess as their first spirit son , a brother to Lucifer .
The Mormon Jesus is therefore a counterfeit , a knock off . This is extremely serious because only the true Jesus is the Savior , a imitation Jesus cannot save anyone no matter how sincere they are.
That was Paul point in 2 Cor 11:4 -15 . Religious leaders who come with another Jesus are exposed by testing their teaching with that of God’s prophets / apostles — 1 Jn 4: 1 . Mormon leaders fail the
test . Well meaning people can be fooled by false teachers in these latter days –2Tim 4:3,4 . May God open the eyes of the Mormon people about their leaders and heed Jesus’ counsel in Matt 24:11 .
It would be especially prudent this time of year for Mormons to see what some of their leaders taught about the virgin birth . MRM has information about this . It provides additional evidence about the Mormon Jesus .
The problem that stands in the way of Mormons learning the truth is that they “know” certain things by feelings interpreted as spiritual insight. This includes such things as the BoM, Joseph Smith, the LDS church and the current LDS prophet.
Now try and disabuse someone of their spiritual experiences which they say leads them to “know” the truth. The spiritual experiences are emotions masquerading as a message from the Mormon god. Someone who knows something emotionally isn’t real interested in exploring rationally what their feelings are confirming to them. But……………………
at some point a little doubt about the veracity of what they have been taught creeps in. Then the battle begins and it’s both a spiritual and emotional battle. We’ve all heard about the Mormon shelf. That’s the place Mormons put things that don’t make sense. It’s generally not going to be something like the nature of God and the doctrine of the Trinity. It’s going to be something else. Maybe disgust at learning that Joseph Smith was “marrying” already married women or that he “married” adolescent girls. That could be the thing that causes the shelf to collapse. The emotional/spiritual “knowing” just isn’t adequate to support the shelf in the face of this information.
However there is Good News. The Good News is that there is indeed a God and that salvation is available by grace through faith in His Son Jesus Christ. This is really a life line thrown out to a Mormon struggling in the sea of doubt in the truthfulness of the LDS church and Joseph Smith.
Jesus is so much better to put trust in rather than a convoluted religious system that robs the members of their time, energy and treasure.
Mike R.
My problem is this. You can reason with someone about the trinity until they realize it is true. They will then be able to reason with others and so on and so on. In this scenario other ideas will still exist because you have something to argue with.
Or you can take a gun and tell someone you will shoot them if they don’t believe. Now which way is better? Religious tolerance or intolerance.
Clyde, huh?
Clyde, here’s another , huh ?
@Clyde
Wow. What a let down Clyde. That was totally pathetic. This is one of the easiest most basic arguments to have with Christians and you totally failed. There are so many reasons why the trinity is not correct in the way that Christianity believes and you couldn’t present even one good argument. That is really sad. I don’t believe LDS about the sick twisted idea that God would actually have intercourse with some female God to have some spirit babies, but I certainly don’t believe the Christian idea of the trinity either. They aren’t the same person. I really wish that you guys who are LDS and come on here would at least put up a good fight on this topic. Do you not research anything that you believe? Its not difficult to do. Just do a tiny bit of research for once. Use scripture. Its there Clyde. You obviously can get online so look a few things up. Come on man, do a little foot work here. Aren’t you curious as to why you believe that the Messiah is the literal son of God and Christianity believes they are literally one being? Where did the division happen and why and where did each religion get there reasoning from?
@Clyde
Oh wait. Clyde I think you believe like the Christians do because Alma actually states exactly what Christians believe. Maybe you guys are more alike that you all realize.
Alma 11:26-31 And Zeezrom said unto him: Thou sayest there is a true and living God? And Amulek said: Yea, there is a true and living God. Now Zeezrom said: Is there more than one God? And he answered, No. Now Zeezrom said unto him again: How knowest thou these things? And he said: An angel hath made them known unto me.
You might say this is speaking of three in one purpose but the following verses make it very clear what it is saying.
Alma 11:38-39 Now Zeezrom saith again unto him: Is the Son of God the very Eternal Father? And Amulek said unto him: Yea, he is the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth, and all things which in them are; he is the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
So someone is lying. Either the Angel lied to Zeezrom or Joseph Smith didn’t translate correctly or the later Prophets are lying. Either way the current LDS doctrine doesn’t match what God gave Joseph Smith in order to set things right. Someone is messed up in all this.
Catty, does this mean you reject Christianity? Honest question here.
@MJP
I just see the identity and relationship of the Messiah, the Father and the Holy Spirit differently than Christianity does. I don’t think God asked me to accept a religion or its doctrine. I know who the Messiah is and who God is. That is what counts.
It just annoys me when Clyde doesn’t even present a good argument but I guess when the Book of Mormon cant even be a supporter of their beliefs it makes it even more difficult. What a bummer. At least Google Clyde. Come On.
I have yet to find a good argument against the trinity. If God is infinite then there is no such thing as “outside of god” and no possibility of there being 3 separate infinite beings. God is not A being or 3 beings…he is as David Bentley hart puts it “infinite being, consiousness bliss. The father is the source of the Word/logos/son and he is eternally begotten outside of time before the incarnation within time. This is one reason why Jesus says the father is greater than I. Because the father is the source of his being. There was never a time when the son was without the father or the father without the son because God is unchanging. He didn’t “become” father. The 3 persons of God cannot be compared to 3 human persons and christians do not see them that way. God does not exist within 3 dimensional space and time and isn’t comparable to anything created. We know God is revealed in 3 persons and we know God is not 3 beings.
I feel like it’s a lack of humility thinking we know better than the fathers. There were some serious great minds involved but the reality is they were just articulating what was there from the beginnimg. Just try reading vladimir lossky’s “mystical theology of the eastern church” or John zizioulas “Being as Communion” and the come back with a good counter argument. 🙂
catty, what you see about Clyde is what we have seen for some time now . We simply keep ministering with him , praying for him , to one day discover the fact that Mormonism is not the answer .
I have to say that your comment about how you do not believe in the Christian Trinity is really not surprising given the fact that you only have discovered that Jesus is the Messiah not to long ago . You are not ready to accept the Trinity as scriptural truth because you have not even discovered what a personal relationship with Jesus the Messiah entails yet . The Father woos all sinners to Himself by way of His Son , you come personally to Jesus and He will introduce you to the Father — Jn 6:44
Matt 11:28 ; jn 14:6 . Please reflect on what the New Testament discloses about Jesus first .
praying for you .
Something very interesting has happened to me and my family. Nothing serious but it sure has distracted me.
Catty, I noticed an edge in your post I had not seen before. Not a problem, I rather enjoyed it. I know you see the Trinity differently, and that’s fine for now. I do see plenty of scriptural evidence for the Trinity, and it also follows quite logically from the both singular and plural references to God. If we accept there is only one God, which we do, then the Trinity helps reconcile the plural. How can this be in human terms and explanations? I have no idea.
Clyde, the little drive by posts offer little to go by. As I have noticed before, you seem to do everything but talk about what’s at the heart of the matter. You seem to accuse Christians of forcing the Trinity by way of the gun and now simply say that something has happened to you and your family. Pardon my cynicism but without more I don’t know what to say. If something has sincerely happened, you have my prayers for that occurrence, but until we know more, all I can do is throw my hands up in wonder (though you are always in my prayers that events may bring you to Christ).
I still would like to know the answer to the question – do each of them (ie Father, Son and Holy Spirit) need to be omniscient to be god, or does the conglomerate of their knowledge need to be omniscient for the trinity to be god (ie Father + Son + Holy Spirit)? If the first postulate that each one of them has to be omniscient then we are stuck with something Jesus taught after His resurrection – Matthew 24:36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father“ (NIV) So here Jesus taught that neither He nor the Holy Spirit knows when the Second Coming is going to be, only the Father; meaning that neither Jesus nor the Holy Spirit are omniscient, they are lacking at least one small particle. If we assume the second postulate then all is fine.
And remember the creed does say – “4. Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance. 5. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit. 19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord. 6. But the whole three persons are coeternal, and coequal.” So they are separate persons especially when you look at postulate 19 – ‘every Person by himself’.
@MJP
Are you saying i had an edge in my respose to Clyde or to you? I intended to be firm with Clyde. It annoys me when he brings nothing to the table to argue with. This topic is a total freebee. Why is he not loaded with evidence on this on? How long has he been on this site and he hasnt researched a thing. Not one thing. This is the first place anyone investigating their faith should go and he hasnt done that. I dont know what he is spending his time doing but it isnt researching theolgy thats for sure.
To him, though your language separating yourself from Christians was not missed by me.
I agree that he is not researching anything, and only provides meaningless garble that cannot be comprehended. He does everything he can to avoid talking about the issues brought forth.
I don’t think he is doing himself, or Mormons, any favors. For that, he deserves to be called out, and I applaud you for that.
I should just start playing the mormon role on this site. I bet i could do a better job than Clyde because he is representing his church badly.
Clyde you want some help? The problem we might run into wih this whole trinity three in one mess is where doctrine changed from BOM to what LDS claims today. I wonder why that happened. If you can explain that it would be great. I can explain why they are seperate but your BOM passage in Alma really screws things up if your trying to come from a Mormon angle on it. So maybe explain why its changed.
@MJP
No problem. Im not trying to hide anything. Im also not going to return to the Mormon faith, just to make things very clear with regards to my last post. Thanks for the applause 🙂 .
I guess this topic doesn’t really work for LDS because DC will contradict the BOM. Its a bit more difficult when you have to argue reason between your own texts. LDS believe that God is one, but only in purpose, intent, mind, will, and love. Not in substance. BOM doesn’t support this. Only Doctrine and Covenants is going to support this argument. So here lies the problem. In order to begin to argue the against the trinity Clyde must first argue how the BOM and DC actually do support eachother or he must explain when and why it has changed between the two. So really this topic is at a stand still until he does that.
One God
2 Nephi 31:21
Alma 11:27-39, 44
3 Nephi 11:27
Mormon 7:7
Plural Gods
DC 121:32
DC 132: 18-20, 37
Houston we have a problem. Come on Clyde. Explain this one to me please and I can take it from there.
Ralph, you keep trying , one day hopefully you will stop resisting the Lord ( Acts 26: 14 ) like Paul and leave Mormonism for a new life in Jesus Christ . You still resort to cherry picking verses that you think refutes the Biblical teaching about God ( the Trinity ) . I ‘ll answer your question , I’ve got dinner nearly ready so I’ll be brief .
Your reasoning is that since Jesus in Matt 24:36 said that He did not know of the day or hour of His Second coming then that means He was not all knowing hence He could’nt be a member of the Trinity
You also mentioned that the Holy Spirit does’nt know this timing either hence he could’nt be the third member of the Christian Trinity.
I personally don’t let this one verse trouble me because quite frankly it’s not enough to disprove the Trinity and here’s why :
Jesus is Jehovah the Lord God Almighty ( Gen 17:1 ; Ex 3:14 ) the Bible teaches that Jehovah is all knowing , omniscient ( Isa 40:28 ; 41:22-23 ) . Jehovah became a man and in doing so was limited in some ways ( Phil 2:9-11 ) , His condescension was unique ( 2Nephi 4;26 ) . From the Bible we know that Jesus is still Jehovah today ruling from heaven , the Almighty ( Rev 4: 8-11 ) . So from this we can rightly conclude that something happened to Jehovah while He was a man on this earth which would explain verses like Jn 14: 28 and Matt 24:26 . That something is the limitations of His humanity . So it makes it very easy for followers of latter days false prophet like yourself to cherry pick some verses from the N.T. and claim the Trinity is false . Sorry , no dice . I don’t have to get into a tizzy over verses like Matt 24:26 and be drawn away from the truth about God ( Trinity) . Jesus as
Jehovah is the second member of the Trinity . The alternative is to accept the trinity of Gods who Brigham Young taught created this earth — Elohim , Jehovah , and Michael . Mormon leaders have had little problem with introducing strange teaching about God . This problem could be greatly prevented if Mormon leaders had’nt relegated the Bible to the ” dead prophets ” shelf in favor of their ” living prophet” and his new revealments .
Praying for your salvation Ralph . Mormonism is not the answer
Take care