OK, I Am Confused. Do Mormons Believe In The Trinity?

[dianaiad]

Diana, you do not understand the central belief of Catholicism.Jesus is our central belief, the Eucharist is our central sacrament.Just as the sacrificial lamb in the OT was a precursor to the sacrifice of Jesus, we understand the communion we have with Jesus in the Eucharist to be a precursor to the next life.

What makes you think that I don’t understand that Jesus is at the center of your faith? He is the center of mine. That’s not what I am talking about here.

Marriage is an extension of this communion. A couple is sealed to God. They are married during Mass and receive Holy Communion during the marriage rite. The Rite of Matrimony is not separate unto itself. It is closely tied to the Eucharist.

Ok…but you are still married until death parts you…and unless I am very much mistaken, the Holy Communion “seals” you to God whether it is a part of the wedding service or not, right? At least, isn’t that your belief?

Yes, our hope is in Jesus.Yes, we clearly understand that our communion with Him is Real. God lowers Himself to us at ever Sacrificial Mass, where we become One with Him. As couples, as families, as single adults, as widowed. Every Catholic. Why do think we believe this reality ends at death?

Because the wording of your wedding vows involve death parting you.

You seek to tell me that this communion does not exist. That it is only a hope, when everything in Catholicism is central to this belief.

Then why does the wording of your wedding vows involve the words “until death do you part?” Do you not believe the very vows you repeat at the altar?

You can think of the Sacrament of Holy Communion as a prophecy. The prophecy being what we believe about heaven, it is fulfilled in the next life.

“I am in you. You are in me.” We take these words quite literally. When we speak of the communion of Saints, we are saying that these are people who have been made holy by God, and are experiencing the fulfillment of what the Eucharist promises.

I understand that you believe in a communion of Saints, where everybody is all together in Christ–or however you may describe this. That’s not what we are talking about though, is it?

You are talking about a relationship that is the same among all; the stranger who died 3000 years ago on the other side of the world will be no different to you than the man you lived with, loved and bore children with in your mortal life. The woman who lived in Germany 70 years ago will have the same relationship to you that your daughter does. THAT is what you are describing—

But it is not what Christians mean when they talk to me about ‘being with my wife and children.’ It is not what you meant when you said that surely Jesus would not deny you fellowship with your family.

It is the only reason why we believe the prayers of the Saints, on our behalf, are so effective. They are experiencing heaven, as we understand it. In full communion with God. In full communion with each other. In full communion with us. This is a supernatural understanding, which we certainly believe is given to us by Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and the Holy Spirit.

Does that help?

I understand that you are speaking of something entirely different, Rebecca. We too believe in that ‘full communion with God’ that you are describing…but that’s not what I was speaking about, and it’s not what the Christians who speak of being with their loved ones specifically were speaking about, either.

 

[Scriptorian]

LeGrand Richards did it. He planted the seed leading to my apostate condition.

It was easy to overcome the apostasy question since there is no evidence that an apostasy occurred.

The marks of true religion do include power, testimony, scripture, and enlightening of the soul. But since true religion deals with all Truth, it also deals with history, science, and tradition. Faith must be supported by history and science, or faith is blind. Tradition is nothing more than allowing the dead to speak in the present. As Chesterton said, Tradition is democracy for the dead. Their truths are still true today and we need to let the dead have a voice if they speak truth.

First, I never experienced the witness of the spirit when putting Moroni’s promise to the test. And then I learned some things that convinced me that Joseph Smith was not a prophet. Here’s the “biggies”. The following are pretty much in order as I addressed them in my mind.

1. the priesthood ban on black men was not of God. It was a racist, man-made policy that the church still, to this day, says was originally God’s idea.
2. The Garden of Eden story is figurative, not literal. The earth is billions of years old, God used evolution to create our species, human culture pre-dates 6000 BC. All of this means that there was no literal man named Adam and a literal woman named Eve living in a Garden with a two trees and a snake. All of that is figurative language that teaches spiritual truths about something (the exact details of which are unknown) that happened in the distant past. It also means that, since there was no Garden of Eden, there was no Adam-Ondi-Ahman, the Garden was not in Missouri, and Joseph Smith made all of that up.
3. Polygamy is not justified and is not from God. I never felt comfortable with this teaching.
4. the Book of Abraham is Joseph Smith’s invention (discovering this was HUGE for me).
5. Joseph’s revelations show doctrinal development and contradiction, which is not consistent with Joseph’s claim that they were given by Jesus himself. Compare the Book of Commandments and later versions of the revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants. Major edits to Joseph’s revelations show that they weren’t revelations. You don’t mess with Jesus’s words when he speaks them to your mind. Joseph did mess with Jesus’s words. This one was also huge. I was shocked when I found that some of Joseph’s revelations from Jesus had been heavily edited, and that these edits were consistent with Joseph’s doctrinal innovations. This is clear evidence that either a) they were inventions and Joseph was the author; or b) Joseph was tampering with Jesus’s words to suit his needs. Either is a major indictment of Joseph.
6. Joseph’s First Vision story in the various versions reveal a development in the story. First, it was one thing - consistent with other common Jesus visions among Christians in the area - than it was another. This also shocked me. Joseph adapted the story to suit his evolution from visionary to prophet.
7. A prophet cannot declare something to be doctrinal and revealed by God without that thing being doctrinal and revealed by God. If a prophet declares something to be from God that is not true, then that prophet has taught false doctrine. That means he is not a prophet. I found out that Brigham Young said lots of crazy stuff and declared it to be doctrinal and from God. Brigham Young was, therefore, not a prophet.

Those are the main points. I suppose someone can choose to have faith and work through one of the points while staying in the church, if that one point was the only issue. But all of the points? That’s just too much for a reasonable person to swallow. When my Mormon family members ask me to just have faith anyway and pray again for a testimony, it literally feels like they’re asking me to have faith that the moon is made of cottage cheese and there are little cheese-men in rowboats on the surface. Can you get on your knees and ask God if that is true? Go ahead and give it a try. Can you even make the attempt if someone were to ask to? No! You can’t get past the idea that to do so means you must completely ignore everything we know about astronomy, physics, and geology. How can you do that? Only a crazy person would do it. It’s the same for me with Mormonism, now that I know what I know about Mormon history and doctrinal development. Thinking about whether Mormonism is true makes me feel *exactly *like thinking about whether the cheese men are real. I can’t put my faith in that. The disconfirming evidence is just too strong. I can put my faith in Jesus, however, and I have done so.

NS

I don’t want to be preachy here, but I think you jumped ship a little prematurely. I know all of these arguments and have read them many times. I have seen the strength (if you can call it that) of the anti-Mormon agruments and I must tell you that I am not impressed. It reminds me of the scripture from the Dcotrine and Covenants that says:

33 How long can rolling waters remain impure? What power shall stay the heavens? As well might man stretch forth his puny arm to stop the Missouri river in its decreed course, or to turn it up stream, as to hinder the Almighty from pouring down knowledge from heaven upon the heads of the Latter-day Saints.
34 Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen… (D&C 121:33-34)

I feel as though you were caught in the puny fingers of a contrary swimmer trying to fight the mighty flow of revelation from heaven. If you could only see and know how much God truly does speak to his people. If you could have just understood how to hear him speaking to you, perhaps your eyes could have been opened and your ears unstopped.

In the tragic words of Isaiah:

9 ¶ And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.
10 Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed. (Isaiah 6:9-10)

 

[Scriptorian]

Dianaiad,

If everyone in my family merits heaven, how can we all be in heaven but not be there together? You’re position has an illogic to it. If Catholics are right, and there are no married persons in heaven, what do you think that life would be like? If you think, like Catholics do, that the redeemed will be in God’s presence as unmarried persons, unsealed in a Mormon temple, what does that mean? If my family and I are all redeemed and in God’s presence individually, does that not also mean that we are not in God’s presence together? Will God keep me away from my kids? Suppose I want to walk over to my wife (here on earth) and say to her in heaven “hello, isn’t it wonderful to be here with our boys together in God’s presence”? and grab her hand to hold it. Will Jesus stop me and say “oh - I’m sorry. You two aren’t married; you can’t talk to each other or hold hands in my presence.” Are all of us in heaven, unmarried and unsealed, prevented from interacting with one another in any way? It seems you think this is so.

NS

Well, you know the Mormon doctrine. We believe that baptism is required to enter the kingdom of heaven. If you do not keep your baptismal covenants (individually), you will find “in the resurrection” that you are given a body that is not celestial. When you bow the knee before God at the final judgment bar, you will know and have a perfect knowledge of your guilt, for both your body and spirit will reveal it clearly. How would you feel to dwell among the glorified Celestial souls when you are so obviously not worthy to be there?

Now I am not judging you, I am continuing what I considered was a hypothetical situation. My hope for you is something much greater than a mere compromise in heaven. But those who are honest with themselves, including me, know that we can all be better Christians, live cleaner lives, and prepare ourselves more to enter the divine presence of God. To that I hope we all aspire.

 

[Scriptorian]

zerinus,

You should do whatever you like. I have responded to your comments directly, without cut and paste, and without trying to send you to any personal blogs or websites. And you have done as you have felt comfortable. My comments, I think, stand as they are, and your responses should do the same. I am not interested in criticizing your personality or intellect, and commenting on whether I find either inferior. I can’t see the point. And, if in the future you feel you would like to contribute to something I post, then you should feel absolutely free to do so. I will gladly read it, and perhaps comment if I think such is merited. If you decide to let something end there, please don’t trouble yourself to let me know. Just don’t post. Anything more is really not necessary.

For the record, Cothrige, I don’t find you too difficult to speak to. I believe I have clarified this argument, also, but I have promised Rebecca that I would no longer speak of this subject. So, I must refer to an entry I wrote previously concerning the our differing views on what is literal and what is figurative in the scriptures. Take a look at #506.

This is really just a simple difference of opinion on that very question (literal or figurative?).

 

[NewSeeker]

I don’t want to be preachy here, but I think you jumped ship a little prematurely. I know all of these arguments and have read them many times. I have seen the strength (if you can call it that) of the anti-Mormon agruments and I must tell you that I am not impressed. It reminds me of the scripture from the Dcotrine and Covenants that says:

I feel as though you were caught in the puny fingers of a contrary swimmer trying to fight the mighty flow of revelation from heaven. If you could only see and know how much God truly does speak to his people. If you could have just understood how to hear him speaking to you, perhaps your eyes could have been opened and your ears unstopped.

In the tragic words of Isaiah:

These aren’t anti-Mormon arguments. These are my arguments, developed by reading primary source documents, as well as secondary sources in scholarly journals. That anti-Mormons use some of the same arguments is beside the point. Even those who are most hard-headed in their hatred can stumble upon actual facts from time to time. But the LDS position is a house built on sand, since it requires ignoring the facts, or explaining them away with specious post hoc hypothesizing. Joseph made it all up. I appreciate what you’re saying and trying to do, but the facts are the facts. And that’s all there is to it. Joseph Smith was no prophet. I won’t ignore the facts. And to believe as you believe, I must turn my brain off and ignore those facts. But this I will not, can not, do. I don’t have a testimony of the BoM with which to suppress the evidence, as every Mormon does once they learn the facts.

God bless you on your journey.

NS

 

[Irish_Kathy]

Joseph made it all up. I appreciate what you’re saying and trying to do, but the facts are the facts. And that’s all there is to it. I won’t ignore the facts. And to believe as you believe, I must turn my brain off and ignore those facts. But this I will not, can not, do. Joseph Smith was no prophet.

God bless you on your journey.

NS

Also, one of the other differences between us is that Catholics rely on humility when dealing with God. Where as Mormons rely on assending to Godhood itself, which is exactly opposit of how Jesus lived His life while He was on Earth.

 

[NewSeeker]

Well, you know the Mormon doctrine. We believe that baptism is required to enter the kingdom of heaven. If you do not keep your baptismal covenants (individually), you will find “in the resurrection” that you are given a body that is not celestial. When you bow the knee before God at the final judgment bar, you will know and have a perfect knowledge of your guilt, for both your body and spirit will reveal it clearly. How would you feel to dwell among the glorified Celestial souls when you are so obviously not worthy to be there?

Now I am not judging you, I am continuing what I considered was a hypothetical situation. My hope for you is something much greater than a mere compromise in heaven. But those who are honest with themselves, including me, know that we can all be better Christians, live cleaner lives, and prepare ourselves more to enter the divine presence of God. To that I hope we all aspire.

Yes, I know the doctrine. But that’s not what I believe the next world will be like. The issue is will family relationships endure in the next world without eternal sealings? Since the premise of my query was that Catholicism is true, the LDS claim that family relationships will not endure does not hold water. Although there are no married persons in heaven, I will still (hopefully) be there with my wife and sons. We will interact joyfully with one another, with all the angels and saints, and with all other redeemed people, in God’s presence. We will reside with God in an eternal communion of love; we will all be married to each other, as it were. Instead of just my wife and sons, everyone in heaven will belong to me and I to them. We will all belong to each other and all will be part of one joyous family, brothers and sisters in Christ. That is the truth about heaven. There won’t be men with plural wives and they won’t be physically intimate with one another. All such “earthiness” will be left behind in the mortal realm.

NS

 

[RebeccaJ]

I understand that you are speaking of something entirely different, Rebecca. We too believe in that ‘full communion with God’ that you are describing…but that’s not what I was speaking about, and it’s not what the Christians who speak of being with their loved ones specifically were speaking about, either.

Diana, the difference is where you begin. You begin from a point that we are not with our families, forever, unless you perform a ceremony that only Mormons have.

Christians begin from a point that says, if all of our family is judged by God to be with God, there we are, all together, with God. We have no belief that God is going to break us up. It is not even in Christian thought. It is you, based on Mormon teaching, that insists we should believe God breaks our familial relationships. We have no reason, none, to believe this.

Till death do us part indicates the surviving spouse is free to marry again. It is also the indication that we do not believe marriage exists in heaven, as Jesus clearly taught. This is not an indication that God has destroyed our relationships of love in heaven. This is your belief, not ours.

 

[cothrige]

For the record, Cothrige, I don’t find you too difficult to speak to.

You are quite kind, though I am confident I am irritatingly difficult.

I believe I have clarified this argument, also, but I have promised Rebecca that I would no longer speak of this subject. So, I must refer to an entry I wrote previously concerning the our differing views on what is literal and what is figurative in the scriptures. Take a look at #506.

Promised not to speak of it? Interesting. I will tell you that I get very nervous posting about the Eucharist itself very much myself. A very weighty subject. I am sure you can appreciate that. I also don’t think it is quite appropriate for casual conversation or debate. Pearls before swine and such. But, I do still sometimes comment when I think I can contribute, and I do enjoy discussing different approaches to reading the scriptures which relate to the subject. It can be very revealing, and helpful. At least that has been my experience.

This is really just a simple difference of opinion on that very question (literal or figurative?).

A thorny subject though, once you get down to it. Don’t you think?

 

[Scriptorian]

These aren’t anti-Mormon arguments. These are my arguments, developed by reading primary source documents, as well as secondary sources in scholarly journals. That anti-Mormons use some of the same arguments is beside the point. Even those who are most hard-headed in their hatred can stumble upon actual facts from time to time. But the LDS position is a house built on sand, since it requires ignoring the facts, or explaining them away with specious post hoc hypothesizing. Joseph made it all up. I appreciate what you’re saying and trying to do, but the facts are the facts. And that’s all there is to it. Joseph Smith was no prophet. I won’t ignore the facts. And to believe as you believe, I must turn my brain off and ignore those facts. But this I will not, can not, do. I don’t have a testimony of the BoM with which to suppress the evidence, as every Mormon does once they learn the facts.

God bless you on your journey.

NS

Well, there you have it. You will not ignore the facts.

But you are ignoring the only one that matters: Mormonism and Catholicism can’t both be right.

What are you going to do about your family?

 

[Scriptorian]

You are quite kind, though I am confident I am irritatingly difficult.

Promised not to speak of it? Interesting. I will tell you that I get very nervous posting about the Eucharist itself very much myself. A very weighty subject. I am sure you can appreciate that. I also don’t think it is quite appropriate for casual conversation or debate. Pearls before swine and such. But, I do still sometimes comment when I think I can contribute, and I do enjoy discussing different approaches to reading the scriptures which relate to the subject. It can be very revealing, and helpful. At least that has been my experience.

A thorny subject though, once you get down to it. Don’t you think?

Oh, yes. It is quite “literally” the biggest question of all!

Children of God - literal or figurative?

This is my body - literal or figurative?

In seven days God created… - literal or figurative?

God took a rib from the side of Adam - literal or figurative?

He is risen - literal or figurative?

The Only Begotten of the Father - literal or figurative?

A New Heaven and a New Earth - literal or figurative?

He shall return in like manner as ye have seen him go - literal or figurative?

Yes, it is the single most important question in the study of the scriptures – and one of the most important reasons we need a Prophet of God to answer it for each time it is asked.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Just a bunch of individuals all together. That may be very nice indeed, but…it ain’t family units.

So what is a family unit, the nuclear family, Dad, Mom and kids? If that is the case (and it’s what I think of as a family “unit”) how does heaven work in your understanding? Just how do I get to have my nuclear family together in heaven when there are so many competing family ties. My parents family would include me and my siblings and our kids together happily ever after. But then my in-laws are entitled to their nuclear family which includes my husband and all her other kids. Not to mention that my parents and in-laws are themselves part of a family unit (mom, dad and kids) that is entitled to be be together.
And this is just a simple family, one husband/wife per person.

What happens in family like my friend who married just out of HS, she was married for 10 years, her husband and father of of her 1st three children was murdered. He was a great husband and father and she loves him to this day. She went on to marry the man I know as her husband, he is a wonderful father to her children and theirs. He had on occasion commented on what s positive impact that the deceased father has had on his step children and how he is grateful for this and how he wants to have to the same kind of impact on the children’s lives.
How doe these people get to be together in your view of heaven? Why does God tell a woman (and the kids) you have to choose one for eternity while a man gets to live happily ever after with any number of wives, how is this heaven?

Till death do us part simply means that here and now I will form a family. If it all works out I will be with my husband and he with me through out our lives, like my parents who died within 9 months of each other. If, like my friend, life takes a different turn I can make a life with a new husband.

 

[Stephen168]

If there is no punctuation in Greek, then my argument is just as valid as yours. You honestly think that Christ had to “learn obedience”? Personally, I think Christ was always perfect. That is why other scriptures call him “sinless.”

Which has nothing at all to do with the fact that Mormonism inventioned of the Melchizedek priesthood in 19th century Amrerica.

 

[NewSeeker]

Well, there you have it. You will not ignore the facts.

But you are ignoring the only one that matters: Mormonism and Catholicism can’t both be right.

What are you going to do about your family?

WhyMe would disagree with your statement that Mormonism and Catholicism can’t both be right. Believe me, that is not a fact I am ignoring. Every day I am keenly aware of that fact and the divide that exists in my marital relationship because of it. It’s a divide that emerged when I first concluded that Mormonism is not true and shared that conclusion with my wife. But there’s nothing I can do about my family it except try my best to live a Christian life, be a good husband and father, and pray for them. The Holy Spirit will do the work of converting my family according to God’s will, just as he did with me.

NS

 

[dianaiad]

Diana, the difference is where you begin. You begin from a point that we are not with our families, forever, unless you perform a ceremony that only Mormons have.

So do you. If you did not, then there would be no “until death do you part” in the wedding ceremony. That’s not implicit. It can’t get much more explicit. What is there in Catholic doctrine that tells you that you will be with your husband, children, wife…family…when the very vows that bind you tell you that death will part you?

Christians begin from a point that says, if all of our family is judged by God to be with God, there we are, all together, with God. We have no belief that God is going to break us up. It is not even in Christian thought. It is you, based on Mormon teaching, that insists we should believe God breaks our familial relationships. We have no reason, none, to believe this.

"until death do you part,’ Rebecca. You can’t GET more explicit than that.

Till death do us part indicates the surviving spouse is free to marry again. It is also the indication that we do not believe marriage exists in heaven, as Jesus clearly taught. This is not an indication that God has destroyed our relationships of love in heaven. This is your belief, not ours.

Ah, but we do NOT believe that love is destroyed, Rebecca. You know better than that. If we thought that love itself would be destroyed if we were not sealed as families, there would be no need for the sealings. We would be as you are, figuring that the family is subsumed in that all encompassing thing that is heaven.

No, we believe that love continues, as do our abilities to reason and develop relationships. So…we believe that family units can be eternal. Not simply that we will have ‘feelings’ for each other, but as specific family units.

 

[dianaiad]

So what is a family unit, the nuclear family, Dad, Mom and kids? If that is the case (and it’s what I think of as a family “unit”) how does heaven work in your understanding? Just how do I get to have my nuclear family together in heaven when there are so many competing family ties. My parents family would include me and my siblings and our kids together happily ever after. But then my in-laws are entitled to their nuclear family which includes my husband and all her other kids. Not to mention that my parents and in-laws are themselves part of a family unit (mom, dad and kids) that is entitled to be be together.
And this is just a simple family, one husband/wife per person.

What happens in family like my friend who married just out of HS, she was married for 10 years, her husband and father of of her 1st three children was murdered. He was a great husband and father and she loves him to this day. She went on to marry the man I know as her husband, he is a wonderful father to her children and theirs. He had on occasion commented on what s positive impact that the deceased father has had on his step children and how he is grateful for this and how he wants to have to the same kind of impact on the children’s lives.
How doe these people get to be together in your view of heaven? Why does God tell a woman (and the kids) you have to choose one for eternity while a man gets to live happily ever after with any number of wives, how is this heaven?

Till death do us part simply means that here and now I will form a family. If it all works out I will be with my husband and he with me through out our lives, like my parents who died within 9 months of each other. If, like my friend, life takes a different turn I can make a life with a new husband.

And how will your friend deal with the idea that she can ‘have’ neither of her husbands?

 

[zaffiroborant]

And how will your friend deal with the idea that she can ‘have’ neither of her husbands?

She won’t have to.

How does a family unit exist in heaven? How does a person get to have their “family unit” together when they have to be a member of their parents unit and their spouse has to be a member in yet another unit?

 

[CJ_Nick]

She won’t have to.

How does a family unit exist in heaven? How does a person get to have their “family unit” together when they have to be a member of their parents unit and their spouse has to be a member in yet another unit?

Hi zaffiroborant,

If I may be so rude to add to your contribution as this has always confused me.

What if one spouse ( say the man ) reaches the " highest level of Heaven " and the woman only reaches the second or third level?? How can they be sealed forever ( or make spirit children together to populate their Earth ) if they aren’t even in the same place/heaven??

Peace,
CJ

 

[ParkerD]

She won’t have to.

How does a family unit exist in heaven? How does a person get to have their “family unit” together when they have to be a member of their parents unit and their spouse has to be a member in yet another unit?

Zaffiroborant and also CJ,
You both have asked very good questions. You probably have in mind a family living in a home where there are parents and children. NewSeeker, I think, was correct in inferring that there will be loving interpersonal relationships in all of Heaven. Parent/child relationships continuing from this life will be more inter-connected in the Celestial Kingdom, but obviously each marriage that endures past death will have the special union which marriage is or can be, and no other relationship will have that kind of emotional intimacy and inter-dependence.

If one partner who was sealed in an LDS temple ceremony is not faithful to the promises and covenants they made including to be supportive of each other, and if they don’t repent, they simply have not qualified themselves for having the marriage endure past death. It is dissolved at death. A lot of choosing will happen in the spirit world after this life and during the Millenium, to rectify the “missing links” or “missing spouses who weren’t faithful”.

 

[Stephen168]

Unlike Stephen’s belief, I don’t think history, science, and tradition are the marks of a true religion.

I never claimed history, science, and tradition were the marks of a true religion. Jesus Christ started a Church and that Church is supported by history, science, and reason. God would not have us believe as a matter of faith one thing, while at the same time have history, reason, or science prove that thing to be false. History, science and reason do NOT support the Mormon Church and in the last 50 years or so have proven the Mormon Church to based on fiction.