Mormons Don't Believe in the Trinity

It's pretty amusing that Mitt Romney and the GOP have tricked so many evangelicals into voting for him because he's "religious" when his religion specifically denies one of the core, fundamental beliefs of Christianity.
deedub81says...

In 325, the Council of Nicea set out to officially define the relationship of the Son to the Father, in response to the controversial teachings of Arius. Led by bishop Athanasius, the council established the doctrine of the Trinity as orthodoxy and condemned Arius' teaching that Christ was the first creation of God. The creed adopted by the council described Christ as "God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance (homoousios) with the Father."

Mormons reject the Nicene Creed, believing that Jesus Christ was the first born of the Father in spirit and the only begotten in the flesh. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints teaches that God the Father, His son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are one Godhead while remaining 3 distinct beings. The Father and the Son have glorified physical bodies, while the Holy Ghost has only a body of spirit.

The word "Trinity" does not appear in the Bible
The word "Trinity" was first used by Tertullian (c.155-230)
The doctrine of the Trinity is commonly expressed as: "One God, three Persons"
The doctrine is formally defined in the Nicene Creed, which declares Jesus to be: "God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father."

Facts about the doctrine of the Trinity:
It is not mentioned in the Bible
It does not make philosophical sense
It is not compatible with monotheism
It is not necessary in order to explain the "specialness" of Jesus

In Matthew 3:16-17 of the KJV of the New Testament we read an account that includes all 3 members of the Godhead:

16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Mormons assert that Jesus was not speaking to himself about being pleased with himself, but rather that God the Father was pleased in His son Jesus for being baptized while the Spirit of God descended upon Him (Jesus). This statement also implies that it (The Holy Spirit) was not there beforehand.

John 17:20-21 “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

“That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us”


Mormons believe that it is that perfect unity between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost that binds these three into the oneness of the divine Godhead.


See also:

John 17:3 “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

Matt 17:1-5 “...after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,

“And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.

“And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.

“Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.

“While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

John 1:1-2, 14 “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."

Matt. 12:31-32 “And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man (another name for Jesus Christ), it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come."

kir_mokumsays...

your description implies that to be religious one has to believe in the trinity, which must be a mistake because of how egregiously wrong it is. also, your interpretation of the trinity doesn't make mormons non-christians. there are MANY interpretations of the trinity. there is no "right" interpretation of the trinity. but please, don't let me stop you hating on other christians/religions.

LooiXIVsays...

Why are people trying to make this a campaign issue? Being an atheist I don't think religion should be a factor in politics. However, I do feel that people need to arrive at their own decisions about the world, and if currently they think there is some higher power, then so be it.

Romney is free to believe in whatever religion he wants so long as his religious beliefs don't encroach on his policy (which is another can of worms, but not the point I want to make). Romney's religion shouldn't be a campaign issue (which it hasn't been) so stop trying to make it one.

Hive13says...

Baptists don't believe in communion. Are they less Christian? No.

Give me a fucking break with this bullshit video.

All religion is complete fictional bullshit anyway, so arguing which one is better is like arguing about which Star Trek, Star Wars or Harry Potter book is the best or that Unicorns poop rainbows.

ravermansays...

See now, here's a logical problem for me:

If the bible is the word and the truth then it is an absolute. It cannot be changed or added to or reinterpreted. It is set in stone - or more - it is set with the omnipotent will of god. Hence why you're able to quote it with such conviction.

And yet... That would suggest to me that if a man were to walk up to me today an claim to be a prophet from god. He is either a false prophet or insane. For that would allow him to 'amend' the word and the truth and the law - which surely, cannot be? For if the word can be changed and added to by man, then it cannot be an absolute. It becomes subjective. Competing amendments can exist. The Bible becomes a guide based on the latest prophet's interpretations of visions.

So what's different if a man claims to be a prophet happened less than 100 years ago?

Even rejecting the council of Nicea highlights a belief that the bible is an optional subjective interpretation - there for NOT a quotable absolute truth.

Kofisays...

I knew a guy who was part of this religious group that drank wine and pretended it was the blood of some guy from 2000+ years ago. And they drank gallons of the stuff every week!!

Not believing the trinity is a sign of a rational mind, however I'm not sure rationality is at play here.

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More