LDS, Creeds, and the Trinity

[SteveVH]

I assume you are speaking of what we can read in the Bible.

As long as one understands that the Church held this as a doctrine before we had a Bible, yes, the Trinity is confirmed in the Bible.

How can you say they are not separate when it has been revealed that they are separate? The Bible says they are one, but it also says they are separate! Just one example is when Jesus on earth prays to His Father who is in heaven:

This is a perfect example of the Mormon ability to hold two contradictory statements simultaneously as true. Nowhere does the Bible say that they are “separate”. If it does, please provide the verse. You are replacing the words of Sacred Scripture with your own. The word separate is never used to describe the relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. How can anything be one and at the same time be separate? If they are separate then they are different gods. We know there is only one God.

You must open your mind to the possibility that God really is an entirely different Being than are we; one that is beyond our capability to grasp. He is not just a glorified human being. He is one Being consisting of three persons. This is why we must understand the philosophical meaning of these words, “being” and “person”. When we think of them in terms of our modern, everyday usage of language, we will fail in understanding what is meant. The bottom line is that God is a mystery, unlike anything we experience in the physical world. It why we can find nothing that is analogous to God in the world around us.

“These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee.” (John 17:1) Other examples can be found in the Bible.

Where does this say that they are separate? Jesus said that he and the Father are one. “When you see me you have seen the Father”. The only distinction between the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is one of relationship, not being. Yes, this is difficult for us to grasp, but that is because it is a divine truth which is beyond our understanding.

You will find no Catholic, not even the Pope, who will pretend to understand the nature of God. But this truth has been revealed and therefore we must believe it even if we cannot fully grasp it.

 

[LivingWaters7]

How can you say they are not separate when it has been revealed that they are separate? The Bible says they are one, but it also says they are separate! Just one example is when Jesus on earth prays to His Father who is in heaven:

“These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee.” (John 17:1) Other examples can be found in the Bible.

We’ve already explained this multiple times! Orthodox Trinitarians are using these words in a specific way that you seem to not be able to grasp, otherwise you wouldn’t be making this comment. The way you are using “separate” here is not they way orthodox Christians use it.

Orthodox Christians fully accept that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not each other. Christ didn’t pray to Himself. John 17:1 demonstrates they are not each other. Jesus’ baptism demonstrates that they are not each other. Etc. Orthodox Christians use the word “distinct” to show that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost really are not each other. They aren’t faces of one person. This is not modalism.

“Separate”, or “inseparable”, means that the three Persons are in an eternal relationship, one without beginning or end. They have eternally existed as a Trinity. You cannot have a Son without a Father. You cannot have the Father without the Son. Etc. There never was a time when the Trinity did not exist. It is the nature of God to eternally exist as three distinct Persons. “God is one, but not solitary”. LDS have a different view on that matter, as already described multiple times.

This has been explained here, here, here, here, and here.

Here are some quotes from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

253 The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the “consubstantial Trinity”.83 The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: "The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God."84 In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), "Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature."85

254 The divine persons are really distinct from one another. "God is one but not solitary."86 “Father”, “Son”, “Holy Spirit” are not simply names designating modalities of the divine being, for they are really distinct from one another: "He is not the Father who is the Son, nor is the Son he who is the Father, nor is the Holy Spirit he who is the Father or the Son."87 They are distinct from one another in their relations of origin: "It is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds."88 The divine Unity is Triune.

255 The divine persons are relative to one another. Because it does not divide the divine unity, the real distinction of the persons from one another resides solely in the relationships which relate them to one another: "In the relational names of the persons the Father is related to the Son, the Son to the Father, and the Holy Spirit to both. While they are called three persons in view of their relations, we believe in one nature or substance."89 Indeed "everything (in them) is one where there is no opposition of relationship."90 "Because of that unity the Father is wholly in the Son and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Son is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Son."91

 

[mtolympus]

We’ve already explained this multiple times! Orthodox Trinitarians are using these words in a specific way that you seem to not be able to grasp, otherwise you wouldn’t be making this comment. The way you are using “separate” here is not they way orthodox Christians use it.

Orthodox Christians fully accept that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not each other. Christ didn’t pray to Himself. John 17:1 demonstrates they are not each other. Jesus’ baptism demonstrates that they are not each other. Etc. Orthodox Christians use the word “distinct” to show that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost really are not each other. They aren’t faces of one person. This is not modalism.

“Separate”, or “inseparable”, means that the three Persons are in an eternal relationship, one without beginning or end. They have eternally existed as a Trinity. You cannot have a Son without a Father. You cannot have the Father without the Son. Etc. There never was a time when the Trinity did not exist. It is the nature of God to eternally exist as three distinct Persons. “God is one, but not solitary”. LDS have a different view on that matter, as already described multiple times.

I do have a life out of CAF so I haven’t read everything that you have posted. And though I am interested in understanding the Catholic view of the Trinity that doesn’t mean I have to agee with it!

When the Bible says that Jesus is on earth and He prays to the Father in Heaven they are seperate! When Jesus said: “I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God and your God.” (John 20:17) They were separate! I don’t need a course on Greek philosophy to tell me what the Bible says!

Also, I have posted this scripture several times:

“And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: **That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.” **(1 Corinthians 2:1-5) (empahasis added)

 

[LivingWaters7]

I do have a life out of CAF so I haven’t read everything that you have posted.

Uh, don’t you think we all have a life outside of CAF? I work, do research, and am in grad school…

If you’ll notice, many of the posts I linked to were in direct response to a question from you to me! And sometimes you only respond to a portion of it, so I assume you’ve read them. Maybe I was wrong. Here I was thinking we were in a dialogue. Forgive me.

And though I am interested in understanding the Catholic view of the Trinity that doesn’t mean I have to agee with it!

I never asked you to agree with the Catholic view of the Trinity. In fact, in one post in which I directly responded to a statement by you to me, I stated “I’m not saying you should accept it as Truth (I’m not there either). Just understand what they’re talking about.”. Something tells me that by your posts, you really aren’t interested in understanding how orthodox Christians understand God, but merely repeating the same things over and over, displaying your continued misunderstanding of their belief.

When the Bible says that Jesus is on earth and He prays to the Father in Heaven they are seperate! When Jesus said: “I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God and your God.” (John 20:17) They were separate! I don’t need a course on Greek philosophy to tell me what the Bible says!

Oh dear. Case in point. See here, here, here, here, and here.
for why your attempted criticism is based on a false premise. I suggest you read them if you actually are “interested in understanding the Catholic view of the Trinity”. Until then, you continue to demonstrate that you don’t understand it.

Orthodox Christians are fully aware that the Father is not the Son, and that Christ ascended to the Father, and not Himself. Orthodox Christians are fully aware that Jesus prayed to the Father, not Himself. You are using the word “separate” in a way that is not the same as how orthodox Christians use it in the Trinity doctrine.

And I’m sure none of us here have taken courses in Greek philosophy. We merely understand that words have specific meanings, and in theology, you don’t just use words willy-nilly, but to mean something. And, if you are trying to understand the Trinity and compare it to the Godhead (which I assume is what you’re trying to do), you have to understand how the Trinity doctrine is defined by those that believe in it. Until you do that, it’s like talking to a brick wall repeating the same false premise over and over.

Also, I have posted this scripture several times:

“And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: **That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.” **(1 Corinthians 2:1-5) (empahasis added)

And who’s to say that philosophers and men using their God given reason were not inspired by God? Again, reminds me of the relationship between Freemasonry and the Endowment.

 

[LivingWaters7]

Lets see if we can break this down:

-orthodox Christians, in defining the Trinity, use certain English words in specific ways, since the formal definition of the Trinity originated over a thousand years ago in the Greek and Latin speaking world. They also use them to refer to concepts, encompassed in the word. These words include “being”, “person”, “distinct”, “separate”.

-LDS do not share this same specific theological usage. Instead, they use the above words to mean what they do in everyday English. Mormonism originated in the English speaking world.

-LDS use the words “being” and person" interchangeably, as we do in everyday language to refer to humans. They also use the words “distinct” and “separate” interchangeably, sometimes using both at the same time (i.e. “distinct and separate”), yet there is no reason given for why both words are used (still waiting for an answer to that).

-orthodox Christians believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not each other. The Father is not the Son or the Holy Ghost. The Son is not the Father or the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost is not the Father or the Son. Jesus prayed to the Father, not Himself. Jesus ascended to the Father, not Himself. Jesus’ baptism demonstrates this as well, with distinct manifestations of each Person. orthodox Christians use the word “distinct” to refer to this concept.

-LDS also believe that the Persons are not each other. LDS use the words distinct or separate (or both “distinct and separate”) to refer to this concept.

-orthodox Christians use the word “separate” in a specific way when they say “distinct but not separate”. They use it to mean, not that the Persons are each other (which, as we have already stated, is not the Trinitarian belief, but is Modalistic, a heresy), but to mean that they have eternally existed as a Family, as a Trinity. There never was a time when any of the Persons of the Trinity did not exist, or a time when they did not exist as a Trinity. It is God’s nature to exist as three distinct Persons. That is what “not separate” means for Trinitarians. It does not mean that they believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are the same Person, or are each other, are attached to each other, etc.

-LDS do not share that usage of “separate”. Therefore, for them to compare their own belief to Trinitarians, they have to accept that that is how orthodox Christians use these words, and not apply the LDS usage to the Trinitarian.

-LDS teaches the Godhead began when the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost entered into a covenant relationship. Further, LDS teaches that the Son and the Holy Ghost are spiritually begotten children of God the Father (and Heavenly Mother), which we all are. Therefore, the Godhead has not eternally existed as a unity of three Persons. They really are separate Gods that came together at some point for the same purpose. Therefore, the orthodox usage of “not separate” does not apply here, as they do not teach that it is God’s nature to eternally exist as three Persons, since there was a time when the Son and Holy Ghost did not exist, except merely as “intelligence”, as we all did.

 

[pablope]

Lets see if we can break this down:

-orthodox Christians, in defining the Trinity, use certain English words in specific ways, since the formal definition of the Trinity originated over a thousand years ago in the Greek and Latin speaking world. They also use them to refer to concepts, encompassed in the word. These words include “being”, “person”, “distinct”, “separate”.
-LDS teaches the Godhead began when the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost entered into a covenant relationship. Further, LDS teaches that the Son and the Holy Ghost are spiritually begotten children of God the Father (and Heavenly Mother), which we all are. Therefore, the Godhead has not eternally existed as a unity of three Persons. They really are separate Gods that came together at some point for the same purpose. Therefore, the orthodox usage of “not separate” does not apply here, as they do not teach that it is God’s nature to eternally exist as three Persons, since there was a time when the Son and Holy Ghost did not exist, except merely as “intelligence”, as we all did.

:tiphat::tiphat::tiphat:

I thank you and applaud your effort and patience with your fellow Mormon.

For what its worth, I actually learned more from your posts and understood the trinity more.


Anyway, keep up the good work.

 

[SteveVH]

Lets see if we can break this down:

-orthodox Christians, in defining the Trinity, use certain English words in specific ways, since the formal definition of the Trinity originated over a thousand years ago in the Greek and Latin speaking world. They also use them to refer to concepts, encompassed in the word. These words include “being”, “person”, “distinct”, “separate”.

-LDS do not share this same specific theological usage. Instead, they use the above words to mean what they do in everyday English. Mormonism originated in the English speaking world.

-LDS use the words “being” and person" interchangeably, as we do in everyday language to refer to humans. They also use the words “distinct” and “separate” interchangeably, sometimes using both at the same time (i.e. “distinct and separate”), yet there is no reason given for why both words are used (still waiting for an answer to that).

-orthodox Christians believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not each other. The Father is not the Son or the Holy Ghost. The Son is not the Father or the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost is not the Father or the Son. Jesus prayed to the Father, not Himself. Jesus ascended to the Father, not Himself. Jesus’ baptism demonstrates this as well, with distinct manifestations of each Person. orthodox Christians use the word “distinct” to refer to this concept.

-LDS also believe that the Persons are not each other. LDS use the words distinct or separate (or both “distinct and separate”) to refer to this concept.

-orthodox Christians use the word “separate” in a specific way when they say “distinct but not separate”. They use it to mean, not that the Persons are each other (which, as we have already stated, is not the Trinitarian belief, but is Modalistic, a heresy), but to mean that they have eternally existed as a Family, as a Trinity. There never was a time when any of the Persons of the Trinity did not exist, or a time when they did not exist as a Trinity. It is God’s nature to exist as three distinct Persons. That is what “not separate” means for Trinitarians. It does not mean that they believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are the same Person, or are each other, are attached to each other, etc.

-LDS do not share that usage of “separate”. Therefore, for them to compare their own belief to Trinitarians, they have to accept that that is how orthodox Christians use these words, and not apply the LDS usage to the Trinitarian.

-LDS teaches the Godhead began when the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost entered into a covenant relationship. Further, LDS teaches that the Son and the Holy Ghost are spiritually begotten children of God the Father (and Heavenly Mother), which we all are. Therefore, the Godhead has not eternally existed as a unity of three Persons. They really are separate Gods that came together at some point for the same purpose. Therefore, the orthodox usage of “not separate” does not apply here, as they do not teach that it is God’s nature to eternally exist as three Persons, since there was a time when the Son and Holy Ghost did not exist, except merely as “intelligence”, as we all did.

Very impressive, LivingWaters. What impresses me even more than the knowledge you have acquired concerning Christian doctrine is your intellectual honesty. As I understand it you have not arrived at a place of belief in this doctrine, yet you very honestly and accurately state it for what it is without any bias or spin. If there is to be any productive dialogue this is essential.

God bless you.

 

[mtolympus]

Orthodox Christians are fully aware that the Father is not the Son, and that Christ ascended to the Father, and not Himself. Orthodox Christians are fully aware that Jesus prayed to the Father, not Himself. You are using the word “separate” in a way that is not the same as how orthodox Christians use it in the Trinity doctrine.

No, that means they are aware that they are “distinct.” That does not address the issue of being separate.

And I’m sure none of us here have taken courses in Greek philosophy. We merely understand that words have specific meanings, and in theology, you don’t just use words willy-nilly, but to mean something. And, if you are trying to understand the Trinity and compare it to the Godhead (which I assume is what you’re trying to do), you have to understand how the Trinity doctrine is defined by those that believe in it. Until you do that, it’s like talking to a brick wall repeating the same false premise over and over.

If quoting scripture, to you, is repeating a false premise so be it. I do this only to show what the Bible says. And, I will continue to do so. If others want to study your posts to find out what it really means, they are welcome to do so.

 

[LivingWaters7]

:tiphat::tiphat::tiphat:

I thank you and applaud your effort and patience with your fellow Mormon.

For what its worth, I actually learned more from your posts and understood the trinity more.


Anyway, keep up the good work.

Very impressive, LivingWaters. What impresses me even more than the knowledge you have acquired concerning Christian doctrine is your intellectual honesty. As I understand it you have not arrived at a place of belief in this doctrine, yet you very honestly and accurately state it for what it is without any bias or spin. If there is to be any productive dialogue this is essential.

God bless you.

Thank you!

 

[pablope]

No, that means they are aware that they are “distinct.” That does not address the issue of being separate.

I suggest that you address what LW said with your own understanding.

If quoting scripture, to you, is repeating a false premise so be it. I do this only to show what the Bible says. And, I will continue to do so. If others want to study your posts to find out what it really

 

[LivingWaters7]

No, that means they are aware that they are “distinct.” That does not address the issue of being separate.

What is the difference between “distinct” and “separate”, according to you? Why do you say “separate and distinct”? Still waiting for an answer. This discussion will be less of this: :banghead: if you would state what you mean by “distinct”, and what you mean by “separate”. I already have provided the orthodox understanding of those words.

The issue of being separate, as understood by Trinitarians, in their specific usage of the word, which is different from how you and LDS use it, has already been given, repeatedly, and you ignore it.

If quoting scripture, to you, is repeating a false premise so be it. I do this only to show what the Bible says. And, I will continue to do so. If others want to study your posts to find out what it really means, they are welcome to do so.

No, quoting scripture is not repeating a false premise (please point out specifically where I stated or implied that). The false premise is your blatant lack of understanding of what the Trinity doctrine is, on its own terms. So when you attempt to critique it, you are merely critiquing a straw man. You fail to realize that after repeated attempts to define what the Trinity doctrine states. And no, no one needs to study my posts to find out what the Bible “really means” (again, cite specifically where I stated or implied such a thing). You claim to want to understand Catholic teaching on the Trinity. That is why you should read my posts, and that is why I provide the orthodox view of their own doctrine, and not because I personally believe in it, because I don’t. Your posts show you have yet to understand it, or apprehend what others have told you.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

I, at times, while studying, pondering and discussing the Trinitarian conception of God, have come upon moments where I believe that the LDS Godhead conception is very similar to may positions with regards to the Trinitarian conception. I think that the main differences are more in the heads of those demanding that a difference exists than in the conceptions themselves. I think that the OP is correct in the fundamental difference between the two paradigms. The difference is in the degree of differentiation between the members that are God/Godhead.

Hello LDSYep. The distinction is not simply a matter of degree. It is a distinction of kind. And it is such a significant distinction that the Catholic Church, regrettably, cannot recognize the validity of the LDS form of baptism, even though it uses the correct matter and form, precisely because the Trinitarian understanding is so far removed from the common Christian understanding.

To simplify: (1) the common Christian (and Catholic) position is: One in Being, God in Three Persons; the LDS position is (2) God is Three Beings sharing one common Purpose. The distinction goes beyond a matter of degree. The meanings are fundamentally distinct.

Peace,
Robert

P.S. Perhaps the lack of creedal statements led to the redefinition of the Trinity within the LDS church. I think there’s some truth to that. (The country lyrics, “If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.” come to mind (Thanks to Aaron Tippin.)

 

[mtolympus]

You will find no Catholic, not even the Pope, who will pretend to understand the nature of God. But this truth has been revealed and therefore we must believe it even if we cannot fully grasp it.

I know I don’t understand the Catholic teachings on the Trinity, but it sounds like I am in good company.

 

[LDSYep]

Hello LDSYep. The distinction is not simply a matter of degree. It is a distinction of kind. And it is such a significant distinction that the Catholic Church, regrettably, cannot recognize the validity of the LDS form of baptism, even though it uses the correct matter and form, precisely because the Trinitarian understanding is so far removed from the common Christian understanding.

To simplify: (1) the common Christian (and Catholic) position is: One in Being, God in Three Persons; the LDS position is (2) God is Three Beings sharing one common Purpose. The distinction goes beyond a matter of degree. The meanings are fundamentally distinct.

Peace,
Robert

P.S. Perhaps the lack of creedal statements led to the redefinition of the Trinity within the LDS church. I think there’s some truth to that. (The country lyrics, “If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.” come to mind (Thanks to Aaron Tippin.)

Perhaps to clarify what I meant:

For LDS,

The Godhead: One entity (a single centralized/organized body), Godhead in Three Persons.

The same as the Trinitarian claim to God as you stated.

The Godhead has always existed and has never not existed. Christ is Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End. Regardless of any claim otherwise, LDS theology does not give a point in time when Christ did not exist or a time when Christ will not exist. The Godhead was, is and always will be, Three Persons in One. Christ is the Godhead, God the Father is the Godhead, The Holy Spirit is the Godhead. But the Godhead is never less than all Three.

I believe what I stated earlier, the Trinitarian conception of God is very similar to the LDS conception of the Godhead.

 

[kimg901]

Perhaps to clarify what I meant:

For LDS,

The Godhead: One entity (a single centralized/organized body), Godhead in Three Persons.

The same as the Trinitarian claim to God as you stated.

The Godhead has always existed and has never not existed. Christ is Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End. Regardless of any claim otherwise, LDS theology does not give a point in time when Christ did not exist or a time when Christ will not exist. The Godhead was, is and always will be, Three Persons in One. Christ is the Godhead, God the Father is the Godhead, The Holy Spirit is the Godhead. But the Godhead is never less than all Three.

I believe what I stated earlier, the Trinitarian conception of God is very similar to the LDS conception of the Godhead.

Was it smith or young that said “As man is, god once was…”? So how does a man have no begining? And nothing is similar. Our God has always been, yours has not according to what your prophets have said.

 

[PRmerger]

I believe what I stated earlier, the Trinitarian conception of God is very similar to the LDS conception of the Godhead.

How do you respond to this post from a Mormon, who, sadly is banned but was one of my favorite non-Catholics here on the CAFs (bold mine)

Originally posted by dianaiad: We begin with addressing our Father in Heaven because we are NOT Trinitarians. We are not praying TO Jesus, or TO the Holy Ghost, and we want to remember that. We thank Him first, because that’s just polite. We then ask, because that’s also polite. We end in the Name of Jesus Christ because He is the Savior, the second member of the Godhead, through Whose Name only can we be saved: He 'bought us with a price." We are His, and we should remember that.

 

[LDSYep]

Could you please respond to my post, about Galatians. I would like to hear your defence of that verse. Or any Mormon for that matter.

As Living Waters stated, that is the typical response.

Although, perhaps a further statement may be worth noting.

Galations is written to members that are falling back to the Jewish Law. This law was one typified by the Pharisees and their overzealous interpretations thereof. A law focused on the minutia and deliberating concepts such as the distance one may walk on the Sabbath. Beyond this, it was also a law that dealt with finding the loopholes therein to justify and accept violations thereof (e.g. the placement of items at certain areas to label that location as one’s residence, thus enabling a larger traveling distance on the Sabbath.) The “other gospel” referenced in Galations was a gospel that denied the virtues of the internalized concept of righteousness by faith and focused nearly completely on externals.

The LDS Church does not preach some “other gospel” it preaches the Gospel of Christ. Which Gospel is that Christ came to Earth partook of a physical mortal body, taught Man, suffered and was crucified to redeem Man from Man’s many sins, rose from death triumphant and resurrected, ascended to the Father and returned Glorified. That Man may be saved from death and sin and become joint heirs with Christ on His throne the same as Christ on the Father’s throne.

Quite honestly, my response citing “1 John 4” is a complete answer to your statement concerning Galations, as a statement concerning Christ coming in the flesh to perform the perfection of the Atonement is at odds with the “other gospel” that Paul is speaking of.

 

[Bokonon9]

Ask nine Mormons, get ten different answers.

 

[LDSYep]

Was it smith or young that said “As man is, god once was…”? So how does a man have no begining? And nothing is similar. Our God has always been, yours has not according to what your prophets have said.

You state that Christ is God. Was Christ not as man is? From an LDS perspective everything has always existed in some form or another. Also, while there have been many things stated, I do not believe that we as LDS have ever stated that Christ did not exist at some point.

 

[LivingWaters7]

Perhaps to clarify what I meant:

For LDS,

The Godhead: One entity (a single centralized/organized body), Godhead in Three Persons.

The same as the Trinitarian claim to God as you stated.

The Godhead has always existed and has never not existed. Christ is Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End. Regardless of any claim otherwise, LDS theology does not give a point in time when Christ did not exist or a time when Christ will not exist. The Godhead was, is and always will be, Three Persons in One. Christ is the Godhead, God the Father is the Godhead, The Holy Spirit is the Godhead. But the Godhead is never less than all Three.

I believe what I stated earlier, the Trinitarian conception of God is very similar to the LDS conception of the Godhead.

Except of course that this doesn’t match up with what is actually taught in the LDS Church, including by various prophets and apostles.

Mormonism teaches that Christ is literally the firstborn son of God the Father (and Heavenly Mother). Christ, as we all were, was spiritually born in the pre-mortal existence, an idea completely rejected by orthodox Christianity. Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother spiritually begot sons and daughters, including all of us. The first of those was Jehovah, or Jesus (LDS many times refer to Him as our “Elder Brother”). The Holy Ghost was also a spirit son of God. As was Lucifer. Clearly, prior to this spiritual begetting, the Godhead did not exist, since the Son and the Holy Ghost were not spiritually begotten yet. Yes, they existed as “intelligence”, but then, so did all of us. Joseph Smith also taught that the Son and the Holy Ghost entered into an everlasting covenant with the Father, forming the Godhead. It is also taught, not only in the LDS scriptures, but by various prophets and apostles, that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are “three Gods”.

So, as I said earlier, there are clear differences between the two beliefs.