Pyropyre
Isn't it obvious, the Trinity is several times more heretical than the LDS Godhead.
No, not really.
Me: What is a Trinitarian heresy?
Alex Trebec: You are correct.
Me: Religion and Philosophy for 400 please?
Pyropyre
I did miss any scriptures that say that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one essence or share the same divine substance.
I'm sorry.
Pyropyre
I have a hard time understanding exactly what your definition of the trinity is.
Or, that you just don't understand the Trinity to begin with.
Pyropyre
Following the scriptures the creed writers followed and talked about, it appears practically identical with my understanding of God as a LDS.
I wonder what those creeds would be. Surely not the Apostle's, Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds!
rolleyes
Pyropyre
"Monotheism" I think is perhaps a little weak in light of the scholarly research of Margeret Barker and others that shows exactly how they were monotheists and yet polytheists in another sense.
Wow, I wonder where you're getting your source at, plagiarizer.
Pyropyre
You seem to overlook the many scriptures that are clearly subordinational in character.
And you seem to look at so few.
Pyropyre
Are you a subordinationist?
No.
Pyropyre
Do you believe Christ is, in some way, subject to the Father, and the Holy Ghost to the Father and Son, or that the Father is greater than the Son?
No.
Pyropyre
If not, do you believe that subordinationism is flawed, and why?
I don't know. Why don't you answer me that question.
Pyropyre
What do you do with the scriptures that are clearly subordinationist in nature?
I compare them with other verses, of course. If one says that the Father is greater, yet in the other part, it tells that Christ is equal to the Father, then there must be some serious investigation on my part.
Pyropyre
If you believe in the creeds and thus reject subordinationism, and use complex explanations as to how one can be three, without being three but only one.
Three in hypostases, one in substantia.
Pyropyre
The Jews and Muslims don't buy it and view Trinitarians as polytheist.
That's a bit of an overgeneralization on your part. But I digress, I really don't care what they don't buy. They don't even believe that Jesus was the Christ, do they?
Pyropyre
The following Biblical scholars:
Jeffrey H. Tigay
Bernard M. Levinson
Adele Berlin
Marc Zvi Brettler
Michael Fishbane
Patrick D. Miller
Wow. I'm amazed.
Pyropyre
These scholars are LDS and are some of the world's most renowned Old Testament authorities. Yet they all agree with the general polytheistic view permeating throughout the Bible that I have demonstrated in this thread.
So you follow them. That's nice.
Pyropyre
In fact, there is not a Biblical scholar in the world who would not accept the fact that both Biblical and ancient Israel believed in a multiplicity of divine beings who governed the universe.
That's nice.
Pyropyre
What you have not yet realized is that in debating with a Latter-day Saints, there is no way that you can "win" this discussion.
What? I was trying to win in this discussion? "What you have not yet realized is that" I was never debating to begin with. Instead, I simply asked why the Trinity was even brought up. You're the one who started stirring up a debate. I was never in one to begin with.
rolleyes
Pyropyre
On the issue of Gods, the Bible is really quite consistent with my own theological views.
So, what? Do you want a cookie for that?
Pyropyre
Now you're being silly, what are you then?
Non-denominational. I find nothing silly in that.
Pyropyre
You are Trinitarian yet not Catholic, thus does not your church's origins begin with a "protest"ant to Catholic authority, a Reformer who has reformed the church from what they saw out of the bible in comparison to Catholic differences, which I would include non-denominational churches who share protestant beliefs. Explain exactly how you are not a Protestant.
Though I am non-denominational, I am not a Protestant. If I were a Protestant, I would not be without a denomination. To say that I am a Protestant is to say that I am with denomination, though the word "non-denominational" does not mean such thing. I am not restricted by any, nor am a associated by any religious denomination.
Yeah, I actually did.
Pyropyre
Are you objecting to the obvious polytheism of a Trinitarian model?
Again, you don't understand the Trinity. Heck, even Boxy has a better understanding than you. No wonder he's more respected than you.
Pyropyre
Pretending that the turning of God in to three persons can ever be monotheistic is the ultimate in "twisting and turning". The only true monotheists are Jews and Muslims.
Wow, I wonder if they'll get salvation instead. Oops, more overgeneralization coming from you. I have a friend here who is a Messianic Jew, yet he believes in the Trinity. I guess you should call him a polytheist.
Pyropyre
The minute you throw in the Son you are no longer a monotheist and all of your twisting and turning is not going to turn a belief in God and a Son into monotheism.
"The minute you" speak of the Trinity, you really have no clue what you're talking about. Now, again, I didn't come in here to debate, but rather, I asked why the Trinity was even mentioned, when nobody was referring to it until after Boxy did. Yet, nobody was talking about it, until Boxy said something about it. Polytheist. I hope you're not offended by that, seeing that you actually confessed being one now.
