How To Answer The Mormon 'trinity'?

[DAF]

I have a buddy who's speaking with a Mormon friend of his, and he needs help in answering her understanding of the (Mormon) 'trinity.'

Here is her email:

[quote]As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints I believe in the trinity, but not as you do. Let me explain. In Genesis 1:26-27 it says

26 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

If you look in the dictionary at the definition of image it says
1. a physical likeness or representation of a person, animal, or thing, photographed, painted, sculptured, or otherwise made visible.

Therefore, we were created in the likeness of God, a person with a body of flesh and bones. After the Savior was crucified and resurrected He appeared the apostles.They were afraid and He spoke to them and said this " 39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: ahandle me, and see; for a bspirit hath not cflesh and bones, as ye dsee me have.
40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet. Luke 24:39-40. You mentioned that one of the God's name is I AM. We believe that Jesus is the God of the Old Testament. In Exodus 3:13-14 it says

13 And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? awhat shall I say unto them?
14 And God said unto Moses, aI AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

Then in John 8:58 we read, 58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, aBefore Abraham was, bI am.

From this we can conclude that Jesus Christ was the God of the Old Testament.

An example of how God and Christ are clearly different persons can be remembered when Christ was on the cross, He stated, "Father forgive them they know not what they do". Here He was speaking about the Roman Soldiers. Was He asking Himself as the Father to forgive them?

One more example to illustrate that God and Christ are seperate persons is the great Intercessory prayer offered by Christ. In Gethsemane He prayed to His Father.

Mathew 26:39
39 And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and aprayed, saying, O my bFather, if it be possible, let this ccup pass from me: nevertheless not as I dwill, but as ethou fwilt.

It seems a little self serving to pray to himself doesn't it? There are 100's more example to illustrate that God, The Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are seperate personages.[/quote]

What do you guys think? I have a basic idea of what's going on here, but I thought it prudent to get outside opinions.

Thanks all,
in Christ,
Mason

[Mateo el Feo]

A couple comments:
[quote]If you look in the dictionary at the definition of image it says
1. a physical likeness or representation of a person, animal, or thing, photographed, painted, sculptured, or otherwise made visible.[/quote]Neither Christians nor Jews believe that the term "image" in Genesis falls is being used to indicate that God (i.e. the Trinity) has a physical body.
[quote]It seems a little self serving to pray to himself doesn't it? There are 100's more example to illustrate that God, The Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are seperate personages.[/quote]Three Persons...one God.

Although your friend seems interested in contrasting the Mormon trinity against the Christian Trinity, it's not clear that he understands what Christians believe. In fact, he seems skeptical of the quotes of Holy Scripture...almost as if he thinks he's found contradictions. But he doesn't share his own Mormon interpretation of what the various passages really mean (e.g. is Jesus the God of the Old Testament or not?).

[jswranch]

Like I have said to my LDS buddies in the past, Y"our leader says one thing, our leader says another. I am going with the successor to Peter."


If you want to keep it scriptural, go to John 1 and other scriptures. Be heavy on the incarnation. The Word became flesh. The Word did not have flesh, then lose the flesh only to get flesh again.

[DAF]

I replied, slam dunk.

[jswranch]

[quote name='DAF' post='1205576' date='Feb 27 2007, 07:36 PM']I replied, slam dunk. [/quote]
How so?

[DAF]

well I just needed somebody to back me up in what I was thinking, and Mateo did that for me. Anyway, I wrote a very meticulous apology, and it was a 'slam dunk.'

[N/A Gone]

post?

[DAF]

My aim was more toward reason rather than heavy philosophy or theology (of course true philosophy/theology and reason reach the same conclusion, I just decided to use the means of reason to reach the ends of truth is what I mean). I don't claim at all that is is by any means "exhaustive," but it's the simplest I think I could get without getting simplistic.

[quote]Argument the First (lol): Genesis 1:26-27 uses the term "image" to reference the fashioning of man by God. "Image" is a description of the physical, "[t]herefore, we were created in the likeness of God, a person with a body of flesh and bones."

Response:

First, Tradition (both all of Christian as well as all of Judaic heritage) has always held that this passage references God creating man, as you were talking about, in reflection of His spirit; that is, with an intellect and a will. To say otherwise (that God created man physically to reflect something physical about Himself) is to slap Tradition (as well as common sense) in the face, and furthermore, to do so with little reason, aside from "the Oxford Dictionary defines 'image' as..." She's toying with semantics, and not doing a very good job at it.

Second, is she asserting that God exists as matter? To say what she did (that "image" references something physical at all), it naturally follows that God is made of some sort of matter. If we are made physically in His image, clearly He must have a physical "image" to copy. Again, this flies in the face of ALL Judaic and Christian Tradition (capital "T"), and just plain common sense. That's just ridiculous, for reasons I'm sure you can extrapolate. But to state some of the obvious (lol)- If God is made of matter, He is simply not the "first cause" that God is. Matter (read "creation") naturally dictates a creat-o-r. If God is created, He is not supreme, eternal, etc. and is therefore not God. If God is not God, reasonably something else must be.

In conclusion to the first response: Asserting that the "image" of Genesis refers to the physical is absurd. It contradicts ALL of Judaic and Christian history, and its logical conclusion is that God is made of matter. If God is made of matter, he is simply that--made. He is a creation, or even a 'creature.' Logically, creation is not eternal, transcendant, etc. as God is. Creation cannot move itself, but can only be moved. Therefore, if our God is made of matter, He is a creature, and not the Creator. He is not the eternal "first cause." A creation logically dictates a Creator, one that is immaterial, transcends time and space, etc. This Creator is called God. If there is a material "God," He is not truly God, because this "God" is illogical, a creature, etc. (ergo, non of what God is), and not worthy of our worship as "God" proper.

Argument the Second: In Jn. 8:58, Christ alludes to Ex. 3:13-14 in saying, "Before Abraham was, I am (AM)."
"From this we can conclude that Jesus Christ was the God of the Old Testament."

Response:

What does she mean "Christ was the God of the Old Testament?" Is it not reasonable to deduce that Christ wassimply announcing Himself clearly to be Divine (that is, God)? This "God of the Old Testament" sounds a bit (fishy...) arbitrary and like she's stretching possible interpretations at least a bit (or, you know, a TON, lol).

Conclusion: Christ was simply announcing His divinity and His co-eternity with the Father. I've no idea what she's talking about with the Old Testament...sorry. lol (on a side note, it sounds like she's saying that Christ and God [the Father] are separate gods. Naturally asserting that there is not one God, but in fact multiple gods. As I udnerstand the LDS, saying that wouldn't be out of line with her Church, which believes in "sub-deities" and the like. I think she tries to touch on it in a sneaky manner in the next argument.)

Finally, Argument the Third: "An example of how God and Christ are clearly different persons can be remembered when Christ was on the cross, He stated, 'Father forgive them they know not what they do'. Here He was speaking about the Roman Soldiers. Was He asking Himself as the Father to forgive them?"

What you said in your frist email was right on the head, and her comment comes from a really shotty understanding of the traditional notion of the Trinity. I underlined that portion there because I think it demonstrates what I'm tlaking about. Of course He was not praying to Himself AS the Father; as you had so eloquently explained before, He was referencing the other nature of the true Trinity, the Father. As she said (but wrongly meaning), they ARE different persons, but they are NOT different gods. Christ was not "asking Himself as the Father," because Christ is God, but Christ is not God the Father. He is God the Son. One God, different persons. You get it, she doesn't. It's the same situation with her second quotation of the intercessory prayer in the Garden. It's not self-serving if you really understand what is going on which, clearly, she doesn't. lol[/quote]

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='DAF' post='1205609' date='Feb 27 2007, 10:39 PM']well I just needed somebody to back me up in what I was thinking, and Mateo did that for me. Anyway, I wrote a very meticulous apology, and it was a 'slam dunk.' [/quote]That sounds great.

Just one last thought, to expand on my original response. I guess what confused me was that she made an initial observation ("As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints I believe in the trinity, but not as you do."), and then she stated that she would explain the difference. The problem is, I didn't see her present an argument which confronted the Christian idea of a Trinity, nor did I see her contrast it with Mormon beliefs. Reviewing her text she never says something like "Christians believe this," or "Mormons believe that".

I guess I'm still waiting for her to follow through with her "Let me explain" statement.

Edit: didn't realize the Mormon writer was female...

Edited February 28, 2007 by Mateo el Feo

[DAF]

Yeah, SHE (lol) didn't really "expand" on that. She just kind of proposed a really shady idea kind of off-the-cuff, gave a couple of examples that sound logical to a really shallow extent, and then concluded.

EDIT* Yeah...lol

Edited February 28, 2007 by DAF