Mormons and The Trinity?

Question

Though I am Agnostic, I do think its interesting regarding Mormon doctrine that they don't believe in The Trinity as defined by the Roman Catholic Church and inherited by the Protestant religions.

This passage in The Book of Mormon http://scriptures.lds.org/1_ne/13/28-29#28 goes to what Mormons call "...plain and precious things..." that were removed or changed in the New Testament that The Book of Mormon tries to re-establish.

Its interesting to me that Christians agree that the early Christians (pre 325 AD) did not necessarily believe, nor teach, The Trinity. Is it possible that the RCC didn't get that part right?

Marji-
Actually, if you don't agree with that statement then you haven't read your Christian history. Its widely accepted that the early Christians taught various doctrine regarding the divinity of Christ and the Oneness of Christ with God the Father. There was no "Trinity" until after the Council of Nicaea. That was one of the things the council needed to determine. I also said that they "didn't necessarily" - which explains why you can find supporting documentation for your claim. You will however, *also* find supporting documentation for mine.

Anakin-
The concept of the Trinity comes from the early days of The Catholic Church where Constantine called together 300 or so Bishops and Priests from Christendom - east and west. They took all the "books" that were being taught by early Christians and compiled them into The New Testament. This took about 70 years. Along the way, they had to answer and agree on certain questions. Was Christ God or was he man? They determined that Christ was "of the same substance" as God. The problem became - if Christ is of the same substance (divine if you will), then Christ must be *a* God - but God said there's only one God - therefore Christ must be God. But! Christ and God are separate since Scripture tells us so. That means that God must have 3 aspects. That became The Trinity.

(that's my layman's nutshell version. Others are much more versed)

Marji-
You're correct, and I never ignore facts. What I should have said was not that the concept Trinity didn't exist, but that it wasn't doctrine. My error. However, The Trinity was a widely debated aspect of Christianity, as was the divinity of Christ. But my point is still valid - in your words, it was an affirmation of the position of the Orthodox. Early Christians didn't all agree on this point until after the Councils had determined the doctrine. Nicaea starting the process by determining "same substance". It wasn't a given - it was a debate.

Marji
I read several epistles from both Ignatius and Tertullian and was not impressed. The fact that they may have coined the term "Trinity" as early as 100 AD (I didn't find the refrence) only causes me to question it more. I didn't find their writings Godly. I found them political and Religious.
Thank you though. I do enjoy history!

Answer 1

The Catholic catechism says that the trinity is a 'mystery of God'. It says it can't be explained. It then proceeds to explain it's characteristics.

Mormons just take the teachings of the Savior that there is a Father, a Son and a Holy Ghost. We use the term the Bible does to describe them -- Godhead. We say it is not a mystery after all.

Answer 2

Well, since the doctrine was agreed upon by a group of men, led by a political leader (not even Christian himself), it's safe to say that there were a few things that got a little off. The reason the council was called in the first place was to solidify a power base. If everyone believed the same, then it would be easier to get people to do what he wanted. Makes sense to me.

If people were to really research HOW the creeds came about, I'm sure they would learn a few things.

It's great that people have real faith in their religion, and what they believe is their business. We all can interperat scripture differently, I'm sure. So one person could say that a certain scripture means one thing, and someone else can say it means something else. That's where all the different sects come from. Does it mean one is right and one is wrong? We don't know yet, so I'm leaving that up to God to let us know.

Do I believe in the trinity? As an LDS person, NO. Do I knock others for believing in it? No. They have a right to that belief. Although, I wish that people wouldn't use this doctrine as a way to say that we are Christian or not. Refer to my duck analogy on that one (if you haven't heard it, let me know!).

To me, the idea of the trinity is hard for me to not only understand, but accept. I have a very hard time with the whole 3 in one, one in 3 thing. If Christ were God, then why didn't God just send Himself? Why would Christ be needed? If Christ was God, then why did Christ say that He was here to fulfill the will of His Father? Wouldn't that be His will too? Why would Christ say that He has to learn all the Father knows? Wouldn't He know all of that already? See.. way too many things to think about when dealing with this. I just choose to believe the easy way: That they are all different beings with one purpose. Together they make up a ruling body- like a government, if you will. All three together make up the Godhead. It's easy to understand, at least for me. You have God that the head of everything- President, shall we say. Christ is the VP, the Holy Spirit is also VP, or secretary. Put all of them together, and they make up the full leadership. They each have different roles to play and different duties to perform, but they work together in those duties to bring about Their final plan- for all of us to return to them. Easier for me to understand then the trinity, but hey, that's just my opinion!!

Answer 3

i'm a Oneness believer, yet i think that SJC's answer has properly defined Oneness doctrine. finding on who you ask, you will get a different answer from different those concerning precisely what "trinity" doctrine somewhat potential, using fact it has progressed by way of the years into the doctrine we see at present, however the fashionable definition is: "God is one being who exists as 3 different persons who're coeternal, coequal, and one in essence or substance." As I comprehend it, the Mormon doctrine of the Godhead is: "Latter-day Saints have self belief in God the daddy; his Son, Jesus Christ; and the Holy Ghost (A of F a million). those 3 Gods type the Godhead, which holds the keys of potential over the universe. each and each member of the Godhead is an self reliant personage, separate and different from the different 2, the three being in perfect solidarity and unity with one yet another" (Godhead - The Encyclopedia of Mormonism). So easily, decent Trinitarian doctrine isn't nicely matched with the Mormon view on the Godhead; neither is Oneness doctrine. Apostolic Believer in one God, JESUS Edit @ Laffopuritain wrote, "computing gadget nut- then what's distinction between a 'individual' and a 'being'? i do no longer understand the way God could be one being in 3 persons?" precisely! there is not any genuine distinction, the only distinction is a different observe on paper. this is likely one in each and every of the main explanation why I chosen to reject Trinitarian Christianity; this is punctiliously unintelligible, and the Bible says that God's human beings would be waiting to appreciate Him.

Answer 4

I dont know why Glade got so many thumbs down... he didn't didn't say anything at all that wasn't official doctrine. We do believe God was the literal mortal father of Jesus Christ (whether he actually had intercourse with Mary isn't defined in our doctrine, but I see no reason to not believe it - the Gnostics and other early Christians certainly believed that).

We, as well as many early Christians and ancient Israel, are officially henotheists - that is believing in the plurality of Gods but only worshiping our God.

I would argue his definition of our worshiping Christ and quoting McKonkie to support his claim. Its obvious through reading the Book of Mormon that Christ is meant to be worshiped (however, maybe not as emphatically as the Father is).

As far as the original question - Considering that there is over a dozen of missing books from the Bible that is mentioned in the Bible, its not to hard to imagine the RCC missed other things as well. However I wouldn't consider them void of truth.

Answer 5

Absolutely. Before 325 AD there was no doctrine of the Trinity, and if you'd never heard of it it would be impossible to come up with it purely through reading the Bible. After all, Jesus prayed to God, and felt forsaken by him. At his baptism, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit appeared at the same time. At the martyrdom of Stephen, the Father and the Son were seen. How then could they be one and the same person?!?

I don't think this doctrine is a "plain and precious thing" which has been removed from the Bible; I think it is something which has been added to Christian doctrine. The Bible warns repeatedly of people preaching "another Jesus" or "another gospel", and it seems clear to me that the doctrine of the trinity is just that. It's ironic that these days people are citing Bible verses warning against believing in this "other Jesus" when they preach against Mormons, when in fact Mormons believe in the original Jesus of the Bible, and it's the trinity-accepting rest of Christendom which has been deceived.

Answer 6

Well, your premise that "Christians agree that the early Christians (pre 325 AD) did not necessarily believe, nor teach, The Trinity" is wrong. While you don't find reference to that particular word prior to this time period - you do find the concept in some of the earlier writings - interestingly enough - even in some of the ancient rabbinical writings both before and after the advent of Christianity.
Lest I be guilty of ipse dixit - I'd be happy to provide resources to validate the claim.

I normally don't play this card - and you are almost assuredly going to ignore the facts - but your "laymans nutshell" is off base. Regardless of the not so subtle insinuation, I have both studied and taught church history for years - so I know the "nuances" of Nicea fairly well. You are wrong in stating the concept of the Trinity was birthed at Nicea and the vast majority of historians - regardless of their theology or lack thereof - are in agreement. Simply read Ignatius and Tertullian (who coined the term "Trinity" years before Nicea) and your premise is undermined.
What happened at Nicea in regard to the Godhead was an affirmation of the orthodox position, in direct response to the controversial and rejected teachings of Arius.

Answer 7

God the Father created or organized our existence as we know it before, during and after mortality. Jesus was His firstborn of His spirit children and was given the assignment from the Father to be the creator and Savior of this world on which we live. The Holy Ghost has the unique function of communicating with our spirits to testify of the truth of the Father and the Son. The term God, is a title for the position that He occupies. Jesus also has the status of God as does the Holy Ghost, thus three Gods working in concert to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of mankind. God the Father is in charge, thus we worship Him in the name of Christ, our designated mediator and Savior.
As far as our own salvation is concerned, they are the only Gods we need to be concerned about. However, taking the pattern to its logical end, we realize that God progressed to his position from a previous position more like ours is today. That means that there is likely a God over Him and that we can ultimately become like Him as well and have eternal children under us. This is called eternal progression. It is part of the wonderful plan of salvation that was prepared by God from the foundations of the world.
Check it out.

Answer 8

It seems this Q&A has turned into a discusion of monotheism and polytheism. I'll try to add my two cents. I believe that I am a henotheist. This is the belief in or recognition of multiple gods, but the worship of only one. I worship my Heavenly Father through His Son, Jesus Christ. I also believe that some who have lived on this earth have since progressed to a point to be considered gods (see D&C 132:19,20, and 37) I also admit the possiblity of gods we know nothing about.

Oh, and my defintion of a god is a being that can create and organize matter and life.

Answer 9

Mick,

An easy way to understand where we get our understanding of the nature of God and the Godhead is what we call "Joseph Smith's first vision(http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1/17#17);" where Joseph saw God and Jesus Christ standing at the right hand of God ( not unlike Stephen in the New Testament {Acts 7;55-56http://scriptures.lds.org/en/acts/7/55-56#55})

So we have confirmation from the Bible and an independent source of the truth of the Nature of God and the Godhead (which is why additional scriptures and a living prophet are very important to understanding gospel and doctrinal truths).

D

Answer 10

Perhaps the deepest, the most profound of all mysteries is the mystery of the Trinity. The Church teaches us that although there is only one God, yet, somehow, there are three Persons in God. The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God, yet we do not speak of three Gods, but only one God. They have the same nature, substance, and being.

We came to know this immense mystery because Christ revealed it to us. Just before ascending He told them: "Go teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19). We know that these Three are not just different ways of looking at one person. For at the Last Supper, Jesus told us: "I came forth from the Father." So He is different from the Father. But He also promised: "If I go, I will send Him [the Paraclete] to you. . . . He will guide you to all truth" (John 16:28, 7, 13). So the Holy Spirit is also different.

Even though the Three Persons are One God, yet they are distinct: for the Father has no origin, He came from no one. But the Son is begotten, He comes from the Father alone. The Holy Spirit comes or proceeds from both the Father and the Son. These different relations of origin tell us there are three distinct Persons, who have one and the same divine nature.

Even though everything the Three Persons do outside the Divine nature is done by all Three, yet it is suitable that we attribute some works specially to one or the other Person. So we speak of the Father especially as the power of creation, of the Son as the wisdom of the Father, of the Holy Spirit as goodness and sanctification.

The two doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation are the foundation of Christian life and worship. By becoming man, God the Son offered us a share in the inner life of the Trinity. By grace, we are brought into the perfect communion of life and love which is God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This sharing in the life of the Trinity is meant to culminate in heaven, where we will see the three Persons face to face, united to them in unspeakable love.