Does The Trinity Make Sense? A Clip Ft. Hello Saint’s Pastor Jeff McCullough

What does it mean to say God is 3 persons who share one being? Is such a thing even coherent? How can 2 people share the same being? Is not having your own being what makes you an individual person? Join us as we explore the trinity.
Full Interview: Coming Soon

[@MeganRoseanne]

A husband and a wife are two separate beings but they’re “one” in the Bible. Jesus and God are “one” (one team working together for a common goal) but two separate beings.

[@troycline92]

Trinitarian doctrine actually teaches that the Father and the Son are two separate persons .

[@nute742]

​@@troycline92 Thats cool and interesting to know. I think many people don't know Trinitarian believes they are separate beings. (good to know) thanks :)

[@Mike-vg3ub]

Persons and beings are two separate words with different meanings.

[@nute742]

@@Mike-vg3ub what are the meanings of beings versus persons? That would be the definition of what each word means and if they are plural or singular. Just curious

[@Mike-vg3ub]

It’s a stretch, but the sub-definition are the meanings for these word. Being is conscious existence : Person is the personality of a being : This is what those who defend the Trinity tell me. It’s clear to me the They are 3 separate beings with different personalities, but united in their work. Steven sees Jesus on the right hand of God. It doesn’t get much clearer than that.

[@Trit7]

“Part of the reason we are so misunderstood by others in the Christian tradition is because in stressing the individual personages of the Godhead, we have not followed that up often enough by both conceding and insisting upon Their unity in virtually every other imaginable way. For this we have reaped needless criticism, and we have made our LDS position harder to be understood than it needs to be." -Elder Holland, January 2016 Ensign

[@joshua_tobler]

If it comes right down to it, the scriptures are way more interested in the ways the Godhead are one than the ways they are separate.

[@suem6004]

@@joshua_toblerNope. The scriptures identify z father. Son. Holy Spirit separate. Not one entity or he would be merely called God, Hashem, Allah.

[@ctcsadboc22]

Thank you for sharing that quote.

[@WilliamPhillips-m9j]

Absolute opposite ​@@joshua_tobler

[@taylordl28]

I disagree. The reason the LDS are so misunderstood on this is because they want to have it both ways. You cannot. Either you side with Joseph Smith and are a polytheist, or you side with the Catholics/Protestants and believe in the Trinity. There is no reason to shy away from this teaching. I'll never understand why current leadership of the LDS church, if they are prophets, would not want to boldly declare this truth... unless they don't really believe it and want to bring the church more inline with traditional teachings.

[@royperkins28]

All I can say is thank Heavens for the first vision and the subsequent restoration of the gospel.

[@johnrowley310]

Which 1st vision are you referring to???

[@ianandersen7396]

​@johnrowley310 your implication is non sequitur. Though Joseph related different details of the 1st vision at different times to different people, it really never changed. If you've told a story to someone numerous times over the years, you may tell it differently, or recall different details germane to the conversation at hand. The main theme of his experienced never changed even though he might have added some additional details at different times of his life.

[@donnakearse2503]

I am a convert to the LDS church for forty two years. From the time I started going to a Methodist church as a teenage. I always new that God,Jesus, and the Holy Ghost were separate beings. Never believed any thing else.

[@johnrowley310]

AS all Christians believe. Separate beings one God...

[@perrystotts]

@@johnrowley310 that's not what Jeff just said in this video, and not how other Christians explain it. They say separate persons, same being.

[@anitaanita1039]

Grew up Catholic and always believe the same thing

[@jaredshipp9207]

Reminds us how valuable and important the First Vision was. It proved what Joseph said about knowing more from gazing into heaven 5 minutes than reading all the books on the subject.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

He obviously didn't see Jesus and God the Father together as only Jesus has a Glorified body that you can see: and it was him in his per-incarnate visible YHWH form that the old Testament prophets saw : NOT the invisible Father YHWH who is Spirit in Heaven. Joseph can't even get his vision straight as he tells different stories every time.

[@jaredshipp9207]

@@davidjanbaz7728 You've been taught incorrect doctrine.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

@@jaredshipp9207 you have: that's Y you R ignorant of the trinity!

[@brentring5126]

@@jaredshipp9207 That is absolutely true!

[@Lavender-bk8mn]

They both have tangible ressurected bodies as Joseph Smith described. They are one God and we as LDS can be one in them.

[@Killthesefears]

I am so blown away. I love these two guys so much. I am a latter-day Saint and I’m so thankful for my faith, and knowledge of the truth but I used to be a protestant. My whole family is basically protestant and that’s how I was raised. I have a friend who is basically of the same mold and fold as you guys a.k.a. if you put the three of you together, all you guys look alike like if you can imagine the friend I’m talking about his face and hairstyle are basically the middle ground kind of between both of you guys and he is a protestant as well but I would say all four of us are on the same journey, right where we’re figuring out what’s going on And it’s truly amazing. Like I know the gospels true I know the church is true, and I know Joseph Smith was a prophet, but I love these kinds of videos, because as I was thinking yesterday, one thing that is stronger than all of the lies miss truths and falsities and slander and hatred against the church, and the truth is the spirit. And the spirit helps people realize what the truth actually is. It’s so amazing. I know that we will all grow closer to the truth.

[@SacaPuuntas]

I expect that when it is all said and done, these two (and the rest of us)will be having a good laugh at how little they understood these things during their mortal time. With that said, I’m sure God is pleased with two upstanding people doing their best to Know and follow Him!

[@recsporteducation4594]

I respect what you're saying but I feel a need to question and be reserved with Jeff. If he is really seeking to know God, than why does he not lean on God for answers? He relies on his faith tradition, his creed, his education. These are constructs of man. Like all Christians comfortable in their tradition, they don't actually seek God for answers because their tradition doesn't teach that they can get revelation. So they cut themselves off from it by their belief which God respects their agency in doing. The scriptures teach us to move our lives towards reliance on God. Christianity teaches reliance on the tradition of mans interpretation of scripture. If this is what Jeff believes in, he is not seeking God at all. He doesn't know God at all. And he's a danger to those who have not yet been converted by the spirit of God. Forgive my rant. Just thoughts I wanted off my chest. I believe if Jeff were sincere in his devotion to Christ, he would ask God in faith what is true and he would already be a member of the restoration. Instead, he spends the majority of his time profiting off his brand of denigrating the faith of others through soft bigotry. I'm not convinced he deserves any of our respect or time.

[@johnrowley310]

@@recsporteducation4594 You think the LDS god is a man. The joke is on you my friend..

[@findJoyHappinessandGod]

In Genesis chapter 1:26 “And God said let us make man..”. So God the Father Elohim is speaking to his son Jehovah, and he says to him that they will make man in their own image. “us” is plural. As John says in the beginning was the word and the word was with God. “Us” means two people and then are conversing about what they are going to do. “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.” God the father (Elohim) will send Jehovah known as Christ in mortality to the Earth as his son born of Mary from his mother he will inherit the ability to lay down his life, and from his Father(God) he will inherit the ability to take it up again. And God the father will be the Father of Christ’s spirit from the pre-mortal realm and also his physical Father in the flesh. God the Father already has a resurrected, glorified body. Christ is The first born of the spirit children of God the Father in the pre-mortal realm and raised to be God the Son in the pre-mortal realm. He will be born of Mary and will receive a physical body in mortality. But his physical body will be unlike any physical body ever born on earth. His physical body will be half God and half mortal. Hence, he will be the literal son of God in the flesh, perform the atonement and be Resurrected. Scriptures that attest to God being a father of all spirits in the mortal realm and That his spirit children are sent to earth to be housed in physical bodies and to be tried and tested to see if they will be obedient to God in all things: God of the spirits of all flesh, Num. 16:22 (27:16). let this child’s soul come into him again, 1 Kgs. 17:21. there is a spirit in man, Job 32:8. spirit shall return unto God who gave it, Eccl. 12:7. spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak, Matt. 26:41 (Mark 14:38). if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, Acts 23:9. glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, 1 Cor. 6:20. subjection unto the Father of spirits, Heb. 12:9 body without the spirit is dead, James 2:26. preached unto the spirits in prison, 1 Pet. 3:19. Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee, Jer. 1:5. Lord … formeth the spirit of man within him, Zech. 12:1. poets have said, For we are also his offspring, Acts 17:28. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate, Rom. 8:29. chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, Eph. 1:4. subjection unto the Father of spirits, Heb. 12:9. angels which kept not their first estate, Jude 1:6. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, Rev. 12:7 Scriptures that state Christ was the only begotten by God in the flesh: only begotten of the Father … full of grace and truth, John 1:14. God … gave his only begotten Son, John 3:16 God sent his only begotten Son into the world, 1 Jn. 4:9 www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/1?lang=eng Thou art my Son, Ps. 2:7 (Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:5; 5:5). a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, Isa. 7:14 (2 Ne. 17:14). unto us a son is given, Isa. 9:6 (2 Ne. 19:6). This is my beloved Son, Matt. 3:17 (17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35; 2 Pet. 1:17; 2 Ne. 31:11; 3 Ne. 11:7; JS-H 1:17). If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread, Matt. 4:3 (4:6; 26:63; 27:40; Luke 4:3, 9; 22:70; Hel. 16:18). thou art the Son of God, Matt. 14:33 (27:54; Mark 3:11; 5:7; 15:39; Luke 4:41; 8:28; John 1:34, 49; Rom. 1:4; Gal. 2:20; Alma 11:32; 36:18). Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, Matt. 16:16 (John 6:69; 11:27; D&C 14:9; 42:1; 55:2; 68:25). I am the Son of God, Matt. 27:43 (John 10:36; 3 Ne. 9:15; 20:31; D&C 6:21; 10:57; 11:28; 45:52; 68:6). nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, Matt. 28:19. Jesus Christ, the Son of God, Mark 1:1 (John 20:31; Acts 8:37; 9:20; 2 Cor. 1:19; Heb. 4:14; 1 Jn. 4:15; 5:5; 2 Ne. 25:19; Mosiah 3:8; Alma 36:17; Hel. 3:28; 3 Ne. 5:13, 26; 9:15; D&C 6:21; 35:2; 36:8; 46:13; 50:27; 52:44). Jesus, thou Son of the most high God, Mark 5:7. Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed, Mark 14:61. called the Son of the Highest, Luke 1:32. holy thing … born of thee shall be called the Son of God, Luke 1:35 (Mosiah 15:2; Morm. 5:14; D&C 93:14). Christ’s foreordination in the pre-mortal world: I go unto him that sent me, John 7:33 (16:5). Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest, Heb. 5:5. foreordained before the foundation of the world, 1 Pet. 1:20 (Rev. 13:8). The firstborn of all spirits in the pre-mortal world: I will make him my firstborn, Ps. 89:27. I the Lord, the first, Isa. 41:4. In the beginning was the Word, John 1:1. his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many, Rom. 8:29. he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, Heb. 1:6. www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/9?lang=eng

[@benjaminroe311ify]

@@recsporteducation4594 Whoa this is very harsh. How do YOU know that he hasn't asked God? You personally have been present at his bedside each morning and night? Also not everyone gets answers in the same time frame or the same way. I have seen Pastor Jeff be touched by the Restored Gospel. I think he already HAS his answer maybe. But I only THINK that. I don't know. And neither do you.

[@recsporteducation4594]

@@benjaminroe311ify It's easy to know what Jeff is. Do we have the restored church of Jesus, or do we not? True seekers who engage with God in faith and with the spirit know what church it true. Jeff resists the truth, he profits off his preaching in opposition to that truth, and he engages in soft bigotry against that truth. I don't need to know his prayers when his actions speak so loudly as a snake. I only encourage caution. There have always been Pastor Jeffs, in the church and outside it, that look nice and make a good presentation but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. Jesus warned us against Jeff's type of propaganda.

[@AeliosArt]

Seriously we need more conversations like this. Seriously appreciate Hello Saints engaging in this sort of discussion and making it so productive. This is how we stop talking past each other.

[@charcW8850]

This was amazing. I love hearing religion discussed but so often it gets heated and offensive. This was so polite and informative of each beliefs. I loved it. I hope you two continue discussions like this. As Christian’s we need to stop fighting❤ grateful for you two!

[@johnmarquardt1991]

Yes, being polite with apostates will get you into Heaven. Mormons have rejected God.

[@TheDesertSpear]

​@johnmarquardt1991 please elaborate on who is an apostate or not

[@crystalcritch]

Oh, I'm so looking forward to the complete conversation! Thank you, Jacob and Jeff, for the work you are both doing!

[@3dfymyworld484]

The fact that they describe God in a way that we (humans) "cannot understand" because we are not "Omnisient" beings shows that you cannot know God, unless you are like God. and they just wash their hands in that loop. The true Church Of Jesus Christ teaches the Godhead in a way soooooo simple and beautiful that ANYONE can understand. there is where you realize that God really cares about EVERYONE.

[@kensrobertson]

So then tell me, if evangelicals acknowledge that mortals can't understand God, how.can they tell LDS members that they don't worship the true Christ? Don't they admit they don't know him fully themselves?

[@3dfymyworld484]

@@kensrobertson Exactly, they don't understand and they just try to tell that you are wrong, but they can't agree on what's right.

[@Buggitdad]

John 17:3 states that eternal life is to know God and Jesus Christ12345. The verse reads: "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent

[@rhamsesmartinez5007]

Latter-Day Saints live under the illusion that their understanding of God or the Godhead is much more logical, rational, simple, and easier to understand than the Trinity. They view it as one of the “plain and precious things” restored. I too used to glory and rejoice over this perceived simplicity. However, LDS theology on the Godhead is not as simple as the vast majority of Latter-Day Saints are made to believe. It has major issues, as I eventually came to realize. 1) LDS scripture teaches that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are all infinite (Alma 34:10,14; D&C 20:17, 28). However, there cannot be more than one infinite being. Infinity means “limitless or without bounds.” An infinite being must occupy all of space and time, otherwise, it would have bounds. So, if two beings are truly infinite, they would be completely indistinguishable and occupy the same space, effectively becoming ONE entity. Otherwise, one “infinite” being would inherently limit the other, making neither truly infinite by definition. Therefore, for God, the Father, and Jesus Christ to both be infinite, the LDS definition of “infinite” must be modified to mean something else other than truly infinite. 2) Along the same lines, a created being, by definition, CANNOT be infinite. An infinite being necessitates to have always existed in both space and time. According to Latter-Day Saints, however, Jesus, the Son, was created both spiritually and physically by the Father. He, therefore, cannot be an infinite being. Latter-Day Saints may argue that the spirit and body of Jesus Christ are made up of intelligences and matter that have always existed. But that still would only make him eternal in time, not infinite in the true sense of the word. The spirits and bodies of those who will inherit the telestial kingdom are also made of eternal intelligence and matter, but that does not mean they are infinite beings. True infinite beings CANNOT be created because a created being requires a beginning, and an infinite being CANNOT have a beginning. 3) Lorenzo Snow taught, “As man now is, God once was.” Joseph Smith also taught the God “was once as one of us” and that he is an “exalted man.” If there was a point in time in which the Father was not God, then he is not infinite either. Therefore, the LDS Father and Son are both finite beings; one finite being created by another finite being. 4) Another logical question that arises is: Who was the Father’s God, and was he also a mortal man at some point?” If so, how far back does this lineage go? If Jesus became a God by the power of His Father, and the Father was in turn made a God by the power of his God, this means there is a lineage of gods who are all reliant on the god before them for their godhood. But if a god can only be made by another god, how was the first God made? What entity or power sustains the godhood of all these gods across time. In other words, where do all these gods ultimately derive their power and godhood from? 5) The LDS church also teaches that the Father, through obedience progressed, advanced, and eventually received his exaltation. Additionally, Alma 42:13, 15, 22, and 25 clearly teaches that for God to be a “perfect, just God, and a merciful God also,” he has to “appease the demands of justice.” Otherwise, he “would cease to be God.” It is clear, then, that Latter-Day Saints believe that the Father is NOT omnipotent, sovereign, or infinite. He is bound by laws that are above him and that precede him in time. He is not the creator of all that exists nor the author of the moral law. His godhood is wholly dependent on external powers, laws, and beings to which/whom he must submit. This is hardly the meaning of “I AM who I AM” (Exodus 3:14) or “I am the first and I am the last” (Isaiah 44:6). Nor does it align with the psalmist’s words when he said, “Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God” (Psalm 90:2) and “our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases” (Psalm 115:3). It is, therefore, evident that the LDS “plain and precious” understanding of the Godhead, comes with a lot of baggage. It may sound pretty and appealing upfront, but the backend is full of questions, contradictions, and confusion- a lot of which were not included here. So, before you go around pointing fingers at the Trinity, take some time to think and ponder about the complications that also arise with believing in a created Godhead. The Trinitarian view and the LDS view of God each have their own set of complications. As a former devout Latter-Day Saint, I prefer the Trinitarian view.

[@sonar245]

@rhamsesmartinez5007 Actually, it's very easy to understand. And everything you said is just a bunch of bluster, which makes no sense at all. The only reason you claim to not understand it is because you don't like it. The only reason your on this train is because some imperfect bishop or leader in the church said or did something to offend you so you jumped on the angry train and started looking to prove the church wrong in order to justify your anger. You're not the first I've seen to justify yourself through anger because someone upset you. You certainly won't be the last. Lds theology does indeed believe in a constrained God. God MUST operate according to the laws of the universe and nature lest he cease to be God. Yes, he made the rules. But he MUST adhere to them, which means he is necessarily constrained, and therefore not infinite in your definition of the word. We think of the alpha and the omega, the beginning, and the end. To mean something eternal. Or in your word infinite. However, it's also just as likely to mean that he is the one who began. He is the first and therefore the beginner of all things. He is also the last. So when all things end, he will be the last to go. Or that he is the ender of all things. I ask you. What would happen to God if he were to break one of his own rules?

[@stonefallknives5518]

I enjoyed the embrace of man on the left of" the trinity doesn't make sense to mortal man, but that is the point of the separation between God and the mortal". I am not in his camp on the trinity, but I agree with principle of God's ways are above us and we do need to accept certain things before we fully comprehend them. Excellent civil conversation. His attitude shows strong conviction and thoughtful belief.

[@findJoyHappinessandGod]

In Genesis chapter 1:26 “And God said let us make man..”. So God the Father Elohim is speaking to his son Jehovah, and he says to him that they will make man in their own image. “us” is plural. As John says in the beginning was the word and the word was with God. “Us” means two people and then are conversing about what they are going to do. “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.” God the father (Elohim) will send Jehovah known as Christ in mortality to the Earth as his son born of Mary from his mother he will inherit the ability to lay down his life, and from his Father(God) he will inherit the ability to take it up again. And God the father will be the Father of Christ’s spirit from the pre-mortal realm and also his physical Father in the flesh. God the Father already has a resurrected, glorified body. Christ is The first born of the spirit children of God the Father in the pre-mortal realm and raised to be God the Son in the pre-mortal realm. He will be born of Mary and will receive a physical body in mortality. But his physical body will be unlike any physical body ever born on earth. His physical body will be half God and half mortal. Hence, he will be the literal son of God in the flesh, perform the atonement and be Resurrected. Scriptures that attest to God being a father of all spirits in the mortal realm and That his spirit children are sent to earth to be housed in physical bodies and to be tried and tested to see if they will be obedient to God in all things: God of the spirits of all flesh, Num. 16:22 (27:16). let this child’s soul come into him again, 1 Kgs. 17:21. there is a spirit in man, Job 32:8. spirit shall return unto God who gave it, Eccl. 12:7. spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak, Matt. 26:41 (Mark 14:38). if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, Acts 23:9. glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, 1 Cor. 6:20. subjection unto the Father of spirits, Heb. 12:9 body without the spirit is dead, James 2:26. preached unto the spirits in prison, 1 Pet. 3:19. Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee, Jer. 1:5. Lord … formeth the spirit of man within him, Zech. 12:1. poets have said, For we are also his offspring, Acts 17:28. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate, Rom. 8:29. chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, Eph. 1:4. subjection unto the Father of spirits, Heb. 12:9. angels which kept not their first estate, Jude 1:6. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, Rev. 12:7 Scriptures that state Christ was the only begotten by God in the flesh: only begotten of the Father … full of grace and truth, John 1:14. God … gave his only begotten Son, John 3:16 God sent his only begotten Son into the world, 1 Jn. 4:9 www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/1?lang=eng Thou art my Son, Ps. 2:7 (Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:5; 5:5). a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, Isa. 7:14 (2 Ne. 17:14). unto us a son is given, Isa. 9:6 (2 Ne. 19:6). This is my beloved Son, Matt. 3:17 (17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35; 2 Pet. 1:17; 2 Ne. 31:11; 3 Ne. 11:7; JS-H 1:17). If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread, Matt. 4:3 (4:6; 26:63; 27:40; Luke 4:3, 9; 22:70; Hel. 16:18). thou art the Son of God, Matt. 14:33 (27:54; Mark 3:11; 5:7; 15:39; Luke 4:41; 8:28; John 1:34, 49; Rom. 1:4; Gal. 2:20; Alma 11:32; 36:18). Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, Matt. 16:16 (John 6:69; 11:27; D&C 14:9; 42:1; 55:2; 68:25). I am the Son of God, Matt. 27:43 (John 10:36; 3 Ne. 9:15; 20:31; D&C 6:21; 10:57; 11:28; 45:52; 68:6). nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, Matt. 28:19. Jesus Christ, the Son of God, Mark 1:1 (John 20:31; Acts 8:37; 9:20; 2 Cor. 1:19; Heb. 4:14; 1 Jn. 4:15; 5:5; 2 Ne. 25:19; Mosiah 3:8; Alma 36:17; Hel. 3:28; 3 Ne. 5:13, 26; 9:15; D&C 6:21; 35:2; 36:8; 46:13; 50:27; 52:44). Jesus, thou Son of the most high God, Mark 5:7. Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed, Mark 14:61. called the Son of the Highest, Luke 1:32. holy thing … born of thee shall be called the Son of God, Luke 1:35 (Mosiah 15:2; Morm. 5:14; D&C 93:14). Christ’s foreordination in the pre-mortal world: I go unto him that sent me, John 7:33 (16:5). Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest, Heb. 5:5. foreordained before the foundation of the world, 1 Pet. 1:20 (Rev. 13:8). The firstborn of all spirits in the pre-mortal world: I will make him my firstborn, Ps. 89:27. I the Lord, the first, Isa. 41:4. In the beginning was the Word, John 1:1. his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many, Rom. 8:29. he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, Heb. 1:6. www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/9?lang=eng

[@mikaahloe175]

I’m a Latter-day Saints and I followJeff’s channel because I came from his world. I joined the LDS church after being taught the true nature of God and how it should be understood as it taught in the Bible and clearly define in the Book of Mormon.

[@grouchosfoil7509]

And what would that be?

[@tonymason9855]

The Book of Mormon is actually Trinity proving and confirms The Bible. Alma 11:44. 3 Nephi 11:14, 17, 27, 36. What about the revelations from God through Joseph Smith's mouth? D&C 14:1-9, 39:1-6. These are just a few of many. The teachings about the 3 separate beings were never given through that kind of revelation.

[@grouchosfoil7509]

@@tonymason9855 The problem with that is that the Bible doesn't teach a triune god.

[@tonymason9855]

@@grouchosfoil7509 oh so Christians are wrong about The Bible and Mormons are wrong about The Book of Mormon but right about The Bible? Not sure how that works but ok

[@grouchosfoil7509]

@@tonymason9855 No, they are wrong about the idea that Jesus is God and the BOM is just wrong period. (As in, not inspired, not canonical and just plain made up).

[@anzianojackson]

2 of my favorite Christian KZbinrs. This is awesome.

[@ryanburnett8985]

They're both great. Love the civil discussion.

[@mkprr]

The biggest surprise for me in coming to faith in Jesus outside the context of the restoration after having been agnostic for some time, was how inspiring the concept of the classic Christian trinitarian view of God is.

[@suem6004]

But trinitarian is models God as a three headed one body monster. Pagan idol.

[@MrMocheeks]

10:23 re: the point about sounding the same, I tend to agree. I’ve never really understood the trinity as much as I’ve tried. I always think about the so what, what does it lead us to do differently. I like this quote - “In other words, what difference would it make in our worship or our daily walk with God if the doctrine of the Trinity were to cease to exist?” - Karl Rahner (Roman catholic theologian). Looking forward to the full episode

[@davidjanbaz7728]

There is no One God if the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are separate gods only one in purpose . To say that is an Oxymoron statement.

[@lindamartinez7006]

@@davidjanbaz7728 no

[@davidjanbaz7728]

@@lindamartinez7006 YES, a 3 isn't a 1 or did you flunk math. 3 persons of 1 Essence is what the 1 God is!

[@RichardChappell1]

@@davidjanbaz7728 SHow me the exact scripture that makes that specific claim. ANd once again, you make the argument that it leads you to behave differently. Please specfify exactly hiow.

[@awfulwaffle1341]

Why can’t there be more civil discussions like this?

[@LatterDaisySaint]

Especially on TikTok....lol

[@matthewwalker3099]

We forgot it is necessary but it's coming back.

[@paulblack1799]

Amen.

[@ryanobray1]

I completely agree. This is what the world needs right now. Pastor Jeff is awesome and I LOVE that he is striving to build bridges.

[@aceuni-rider6921]

KZbin seems to be the platform for it

[@carlavegas887]

Can’t say it enough, how important it is for Jacob to teach us these arguments. Thank you so much. I wish there were more like you and livestreams every day!

[@rhamsesmartinez5007]

Latter-Day Saints live under the illusion that their understanding of God or the Godhead is much more logical, rational, simple, and easier to understand than the Trinity. They view it as one of the “plain and precious things” restored. I too used to glory and rejoice over this perceived simplicity. However, LDS theology on the Godhead is not as simple as the vast majority of Latter-Day Saints are made to believe. It has major issues, as I eventually came to realize. 1) LDS scripture teaches that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are all infinite (Alma 34:10,14; D&C 20:17, 28). However, there cannot be more than one infinite being. Infinity means “limitless or without bounds.” An infinite being must occupy all of space and time, otherwise, it would have bounds. So, if two beings are truly infinite, they would be completely indistinguishable and occupy the same space, effectively becoming ONE entity. Otherwise, one “infinite” being would inherently limit the other, making neither truly infinite by definition. Therefore, for God, the Father, and Jesus Christ to both be infinite, the LDS definition of “infinite” must be modified to mean something else other than truly infinite. 2) Along the same lines, a created being, by definition, CANNOT be infinite. An infinite being necessitates to have always existed in both space and time. According to Latter-Day Saints, however, Jesus, the Son, was created both spiritually and physically by the Father. He, therefore, cannot be an infinite being. Latter-Day Saints may argue that the spirit and body of Jesus Christ are made up of intelligences and matter that have always existed. But that still would only make him eternal in time, not infinite in the true sense of the word. The spirits and bodies of those who will inherit the telestial kingdom are also made of eternal intelligence and matter, but that does not mean they are infinite beings. True infinite beings CANNOT be created because a created being requires a beginning, and an infinite being CANNOT have a beginning. 3) Lorenzo Snow taught, “As man now is, God once was.” Joseph Smith also taught the God “was once as one of us” and that he is an “exalted man.” If there was a point in time in which the Father was not God, then he is not infinite either. Therefore, the LDS Father and Son are both finite beings; one finite being created by another finite being. 4) Another logical question that arises is: Who was the Father’s God, and was he also a mortal man at some point?” If so, how far back does this lineage go? If Jesus became a God by the power of His Father, and the Father was in turn made a God by the power of his God, this means there is a lineage of gods who are all reliant on the god before them for their godhood. But if a god can only be made by another god, how was the first God made? What entity or power sustains the godhood of all these gods across time. In other words, where do all these gods ultimately derive their power and godhood from? 5) The LDS church also teaches that the Father, through obedience progressed, advanced, and eventually received his exaltation. Additionally, Alma 42:13, 15, 22, and 25 clearly teaches that for God to be a “perfect, just God, and a merciful God also,” he has to “appease the demands of justice.” Otherwise, he “would cease to be God.” It is clear, then, that Latter-Day Saints believe that the Father is NOT omnipotent, sovereign, or infinite. He is bound by laws that are above him and that precede him in time. He is not the creator of all that exists nor the author of the moral law. His godhood is wholly dependent on external powers, laws, and beings to which/whom he must submit. This is hardly the meaning of “I AM who I AM” (Exodus 3:14) or “I am the first and I am the last” (Isaiah 44:6). Nor does it align with the psalmist’s words when he said, “Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God” (Psalm 90:2) and “our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases” (Psalm 115:3). It is, therefore, evident that the LDS “plain and precious” understanding of the Godhead, comes with a lot of baggage. It may sound pretty and appealing upfront, but the backend is full of questions, contradictions, and confusion- a lot of which were not included here. Latter-Day Saints, therefore, need to take some time to think and ponder about the complications that also arise with believing in a created Godhead. The Trinitarian view and the LDS view of God each have their own set of complications. As a former devout Latter-Day Saint, I prefer the Trinitarian view.

[@patriot8087]

I can't help but have so much respect for you both, knowing how passionate you both are in your own understand of what you believe in and is the fundament part of your individual faith. God Bless you both for the respect you know each other as we all try to learn of our God.

[@marilynnkerr9706]

and Heavenly father always introduces his Son. this is my beloved son, hear him

[@chrisblanc663]

Yup. In the New Testament during His baptism, in the Book of Mormon when He descended on the Nephites. And in the first vision. “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” What a beautiful testimony, and witness.

[@johnrowley310]

@@chrisblanc663 A voice from the heavens.

[@jcal6022]

When I was a Kid and they tried to teach me the Nicene Creed at the Church I grew up in it never made any sense too me. Funny enough my wife had a Conversation like 12 years before we joined the Church that apparently gave her Cause to abandon the Trinity so much so that before she joined the Church expressed too me that she always avoided teaching the Trinity, but I testify the Trinity is real because I will not deny the Holy Ghost, but at the time I had no way to understand the Holy Ghost, but after learning about the Fullness of The Gospel I finally understood that it was real...its not just some Metaphysical Man Made Jargon, but a very real Entity that is a Comforter and Revelator, and Oh Boy was it all those things when my Mom died around the Time I started Reading the book of Mormon.

[@carlavegas887]

Thank you for sharing that.

[@lyndasquires2860]

The trinity and Nicene Creed were why I left my childhood church. Just made no sense. The teachings of the Godhead of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints was the truth I sought.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

@@lyndasquires2860 simplistic gods for simplistic minds : makes sense!

[@lyndasquires2860]

@@davidjanbaz7728 Truth IS simple. We were made in God's image.

[@nute742]

@@davidjanbaz7728 Yes simple. It was taught if we are not like a "little" child we cannot enter the Kingdom of God. Little children (although limited in knowledge) even know of Gods love. (even the older children too). However we all were with God (lived with both him + Jesus in our premortal life) in the heavens. We are all then sent down here for " phase II". Arriving safely in Phase III is next step. God Bless :)

[@dwRS1]

Interesting. Jeff concluded that he believed the Trinity because he didn't understand it. I very much enjoyed this civil discussion.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

That's not what he said: you can understand what the Trinity states but you cannot understand how God can be tri- personal but yet One Essence of being. Unless you understand the Israelite theology of the Two Powers in Heaven understanding of Biblical Judaism: which Rabbinic Judaism rejected in the 2nd century AD.

[@leightonanderson]

@@davidjanbaz7728 Right. Because three persons equal three beings. This is unavoidable.

[@cameronbailey9704]

​@@leightonandersonActually the way it was defined back in the Early Church was not "one being, three persons." In the original Greek, the terms used were one "ousia" and three "hypostases." These terms are tough to translate to English, which doesn't do them near enough justice, but "ousia" essentially means substance, essence, or nature, while "hypostasis" means subsistence, existence, or reality. I know, it's complicated 😂. The Latin translation of "hypostases" is "personas," which is where we get the term persons. Nowadays, the word person implies an individual or even a being, which is not what we believe. WHAT God is is his substance or "ousia," but WHO God is is his subsistence or "hypostases." There is a clear distinction between his three hypostases, but the ousia is essentially what unites them and makes God one. Now, this is tough to explain, so please don't confuse Trinitarian beliefs with modalism, partialism, or any other heresy. With all this being said, all three hypostases are all knowing, all powerful, all perfect, all loving, co-eternal, consubstantial, and co-equal. They are all fully God; they have one "ousia." Thus we have one God who subsists not in three ways or forms, but in three realities. Hopefully this explanation wasn't too confusing lol. I think that's what Pastor Jeff was getting at when he said God is beyond our finite human understanding. God bless 🙏

[@leightonanderson]

@@cameronbailey9704 well, it was too confusing lol. And honestly if you’re trying, and failing, to explain something that you say is tough to explain, then throwing in an lol and some emojis doesn’t help. At all. It also doesn’t help to insist on using Greek terms that, you then say, are “tough to translate in English.” That’s a dodge. You and I, we’re English speakers, addressing each other in the English language. You’re purporting to offer an explanation of what is ultimately nonsense metaphysics, but of course you want me to believe that it can be explained. So, explain it. In English. I already know you can’t do it - no one can - and Pastor Jeff admits as much right here. At 14:25 in the video. The worst part of your non-explanation is where you tell me that “he” (referring to God) has “three hypostases,” by which you mean (as you said) three personas (Latin) or persons (English), after which you insisted that that not be confused with modalism or partialism. Well, why the heck not? You have to say that because as soon as you have a “he” (and so that’s a “who,” in your terminology here, and not an underlying nature or type) comprised of three personas, three persons, three beings, whatever they are, then that sure as God made little green apples IS modalism or partialism or some other contradiction of your premise that “he” is undivided. So I can well understand why you have to resort to special pleading to rule out the heresies, but it still leaves you with the same original contradiction. And it leaves you, still, with the problem that an explanation that doesn’t explain is no explanation at all. It’s just layering nonsense on top of nonsense with more nonsense coming on top of that. Just like the Pastor says, it makes no sense. And neither the Father of whom we are nor the Son through whom we are (1 Cor 8:6) require us to affirm nonsense propositions. You and the Pastor (among many others, of course) are just wrong about that. I’m sure it grieves the Lord that you waste so much time and energy adversely judging disciples of Christ who see these things more clearly than you. You guys should just let it go.

[@cameronbailey9704]

@@leightonanderson I do apologize for the confusion sir, and yes the emojis were immature, so allow me to clarify. Modalism states that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three "modes" of God and that he can only be one mode at one time. Obviously, we both agree this is incorrect because of Scripture such as Christ's baptism, where we see all three interacting. So we agree, they must be distinct. Partialism states that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are just three parts of God, so each is essentially 1/3 of God. But we confess that each is fully God. All three persons have everything that makes God God; they are all powerful, all knowing, all loving, co-eternal, consubstantial, and co-equal, like I said before. Yes, God is infinite; his divinity cannot be divided. This does not mean that the three persons of the Trinity "divide" God's divinity. Now I want to specifically emphasize the co-eternal and consubstantial qualities of the three persons, just bear with me here. That all three are co-eternal means that no one came before another. Eternality for God is infinitely backwards and infinitely forwards because he's outside of time, unlike our eternal lives which are from one point in time infinitely forwards. The Son is eternally begotten, not created at a point in time, of one substance with the Father, God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God. The Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son. Since the Father gives through eternal generation to his only-begotten Son everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom he is eternally born, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son. So we have three persons that are all fully God, but the Father is uniquely unbegotten, the Son is uniquely begotten, and the Spirit uniquely proceeds. They are distinct in this way, but God is still one. Since all three are fully God, and we know that God is one, we arrive at the conclusion that they are consubstantial (or they share the same essence). We define God as the uncaused cause. God has to be one substance, or else you violate the co-eternality of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. If you have three separate beings that are all co-eternal, well then you really only have one being, because only one being can be the uncaused cause. Jesus Christ is the Alpha and the Omega (Revelation 22:13), but this could not be true if he came after the Father, because remember, "Alpha" has to be infinitely backwards. The Son and Holy Spirit cannot be subordinate to the Father. So hopefully that clarifies that a bit. Feel free to ask questions if you'd like me to clarify anything further. And no, I'm not trying to hate on you for believing what you believe --- I love my LDS friends. I am simply explaining our understanding.

[@joshuasmith2689]

Exceptionally well done! Great discussion. Can't wait for the next clips.

[@Catherine-tb2ss]

I clicked on this so fast. Thanks for the excellent content, Jacob! 🎉

[@joncharlotteschoen]

Pastor Jeff, thanks as always for having a dialogue in love and with respect.

[@marilynnkerr9706]

Jesus prayed "let us be one as thee and I are one" he means one in purpose

[@johnrowley310]

You read his mind. You are the real god I guess...

[@hopeyoung7216]

My simple mind goes by things Jesus says" Father forgive them for they know not what they do" In the garden before Juda betrays him. ""Father take this cup from me but not my will but they will be done" " For God so loved the World that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life " thanks guys for doing this so respectfully. Thats the Jesus way !

[@davidjanbaz7728]

Jesus claimed to be the visible YHWH coming in the clouds of heaven in Matthew 26:62-65 . The High Priest understood exactly what Jesus said and he said Jesus blasphemed in claiming to be equal in nature to the invisible YHWH ( God of the Jews) .

[@ltinfpr2j247]

Wonderful heartfelt searching conversation. ♥️

[@susieoneil5706]

John17:3 - "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." I think we are supposed to try to know God. If the difference is that trinitarians call it a mystery and LDS try to comprehend it, I know which I prefer. But thanks to both Jacob and Jeff. I really enjoyed this conversation and love that these things are being discussed so well.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

John 17: 3 is not a verse in a vacuum: its context is John 1:1 ; 1:18; and 17: 11,12 ; 21-26.

[@rhamsesmartinez5007]

We do try to comprehend it. But we acknowledge that there are some aspects of it that we won't understand in this life. Just like Latter-Day Saints don't understand where God the Father derives his power and godhood from.

[@dustingoldman]

Great conversation. We all have so much to learn about this topic. I appreciate being a fly on the wall for this conversation. One thing that stood out to me is when Pastor Jeff said (paraphrased) he didn’t understand the formation of the universe, etc. because he wasn’t there-such a true statement (obviously 😊). This is of course why we don’t know, first-hand, a lot of things today. We wrestle with trying to understand through the Spirit. That being said, and I would imagine it will come up in the complete discussion, there is an important place for the Joseph Smith perspective. As a believing Latter-day Saint, there is place for modern-day prophetic insight. I as well wasn’t there for the creation, nor do I have any memory of being with God. However, I do believe Joseph Smith was who he says he was and experienced what he said he experienced. One key experience was his first vision and interacting personally with God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ. A core doctrine, centrally placed with other core doctrines, that are foundational to Latter-day Saint perspective and understanding. Thanks for the great content!

[@davidjanbaz7728]

Dustin: the big bang cosmology agrees with the Biblical view that God created the Universe at specific point and time stated from that point. Joseph Smith's infinite Universe and infinite regression of gods is not in line with the Bible or Science. I would have you investigate : Reasons to Believe channel for good Science and Theology.

[@dustingoldman]

Thank you, David, for your insight. Although I disagree (and to understand why I disagree would take much more time), I can appreciate your perspective. Thanks for taking the time to reply. Have a great day!

[@darlenemartim9972]

It’s always interesting to see anyone TRY to explain the trinity

[@suem6004]

Yep. The knots the trinitarians get into describing God as a three headed one body monster yet makes sense? Maybe... if one is used to pagan piecemeal gods

[@johnrowley310]

Yep, the conundrum that God the father is copulating with one of his wives as we speak. No time to answer prayer during orgasm...

[@rhamsesmartinez5007]

@@suem6004 Latter-Day Saints live under the illusion that their understanding of God or the Godhead is much more logical, rational, simple, and easier to understand than the Trinity. They view it as one of the “plain and precious things” restored. I too used to glory and rejoice over this perceived simplicity. However, LDS theology on the Godhead is not as simple as the vast majority of Latter-Day Saints are made to believe. It has major issues, as I eventually came to realize. 1) LDS scripture teaches that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are all infinite (Alma 34:10,14; D&C 20:17, 28). However, there cannot be more than one infinite being. Infinity means “limitless or without bounds.” An infinite being must occupy all of space and time, otherwise, it would have bounds. So, if two beings are truly infinite, they would be completely indistinguishable and occupy the same space, effectively becoming ONE entity. Otherwise, one “infinite” being would inherently limit the other, making neither truly infinite by definition. Therefore, for God, the Father, and Jesus Christ to both be infinite, the LDS definition of “infinite” must be modified to mean something else other than truly infinite. 2) Along the same lines, a created being, by definition, CANNOT be infinite. An infinite being necessitates to have always existed in both space and time. According to Latter-Day Saints, however, Jesus, the Son, was created both spiritually and physically by the Father. He, therefore, cannot be an infinite being. Latter-Day Saints may argue that the spirit and body of Jesus Christ are made up of intelligences and matter that have always existed. But that still would only make him eternal in time, not infinite in the true sense of the word. The spirits and bodies of those who will inherit the telestial kingdom are also made of eternal intelligence and matter, but that does not mean they are infinite beings. True infinite beings CANNOT be created because a created being requires a beginning, and an infinite being CANNOT have a beginning. 3) Lorenzo Snow taught, “As man now is, God once was.” Joseph Smith also taught the God “was once as one of us” and that he is an “exalted man.” If there was a point in time in which the Father was not God, then he is not infinite either. Therefore, the LDS Father and Son are both finite beings; one finite being created by another finite being. 4) Another logical question that arises is: Who was the Father’s God, and was he also a mortal man at some point?” If so, how far back does this lineage go? If Jesus became a God by the power of His Father, and the Father was in turn made a God by the power of his God, this means there is a lineage of gods who are all reliant on the god before them for their godhood. But if a god can only be made by another god, how was the first God made? What entity or power sustains the godhood of all these gods across time. In other words, where do all these gods ultimately derive their power and godhood from? 5) The LDS church also teaches that the Father, through obedience progressed, advanced, and eventually received his exaltation. Additionally, Alma 42:13, 15, 22, and 25 clearly teaches that for God to be a “perfect, just God, and a merciful God also,” he has to “appease the demands of justice.” Otherwise, he “would cease to be God.” It is clear, then, that Latter-Day Saints believe that the Father is NOT omnipotent, sovereign, or infinite. He is bound by laws that are above him and that precede him in time. He is not the creator of all that exists nor the author of the moral law. His godhood is wholly dependent on external powers, laws, and beings to which/whom he must submit. This is hardly the meaning of “I AM who I AM” (Exodus 3:14) or “I am the first and I am the last” (Isaiah 44:6). Nor does it align with the psalmist’s words when he said, “Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God” (Psalm 90:2) and “our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases” (Psalm 115:3). It is, therefore, evident that the LDS “plain and precious” understanding of the Godhead, comes with a lot of baggage. It may sound pretty and appealing upfront, but the backend is full of questions, contradictions, and confusion- a lot of which were not included here. So, before you go around pointing fingers at the Trinity, take some time to think and ponder about the complications that also arise with believing in a created Godhead. The Trinitarian view and the LDS view of God each have their own set of complications. As a former devout Latter-Day Saint, I prefer the Trinitarian view.

[@woutjewaalre]

I am a Catholic priest, following Pastor Jeff's channel on getting to know better the LDS faith, fully sharing his respectful dialogue with LDS believers. I have positive dealings with some of them, and I certainly acknowledge that they have a common passion and respect for Jesus Christ. I really liked pastor Jeff's explanation of the Trinity, starting with the believe in the unity and uniqueness of God, creedal Christiany share with judaism (and Islam) and that is what whe believe the bible teaches. He also stated very clearly that creedal Christians believe that there is a huge difference between the Creator and His creation, in the sense that we believe that God is not a part of creation. There ourLDS friend (Jacob?) made a very interesting comment, saying that it almost looks like that our creedal Christian God appears to be a God outiside reality. I really liked that, because it explains why LDS faitful have a hard time to understand the Trinitarian God of traditional Christians. By my study of LDS faith I can understand that problem they might have with that, and that starts with the difference of what we understand by creation. Traditional Christianity believes in creation "ex nihilo", God is above all creation, and not created, and Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is not created. LDS faith believes in eternal matter, and that God once was a man a whe are, so God is essentialy "one of us", and whe have the possibility to become like Him. I guess that they would say that Christ became human to get to be like His Father, and we, as spirit brothers, will follow that pattern Jesus Christ followed as well, so that we could progress also to the same glory as Our Heavenly Father. In that sense, God in LDS faith, appears to be more nearer to us humans than in traditional Christianity. I am not sure wether I am right or not, but because whe are the literal children of Heavenly Father, we sare the same nature as He does, and also the angels share that same nature, because we are all part of the same family with Heavenly Father as our literal (spiritual) Father, there is only a difference in the progress we are making to become more like Him. So being part of God's family feels more natural than in traditional Christianity. For traditional Christians there is indeed a sorte of gap between God, the Creator, and creation, for us angels and humans are different created beings, who never can be God in the same way as our Creator. With our intelligence, ( if we are using it in the right way) whe can come to the acknowledgement of God, but the intelectual ways whe can have get there are do not tell us that God is a trinitarian God, He could even be a little bit distant, as LDS faitful could say. That is why it is so important that whe believe that God revealed Himself, and that is what we believe is told in the Holy Bible, trough the profets God made Himself known as a caring and loving Father, who even wanted to show His love and forgiveness sending us His Son, who became man, just like us, without loosing His divinity. whe believe that trough the Incarnation God became one of us, so that He could make us His adoptive children, His sons and daughter, and that is in another way Jesus Christ is His Son, altough Jesus Christ shared the same human nature as we share. Thank you both for your respectful way to talk about your faith. Without that love between each other neither of you (and me a Catholic) could call himself in a honest way a follower of Jesus Christ!

[@JoneThePwn]

As a devout member of the church of Jesus Christ, I think you 100% nailed the crux of the difference. It lies in how we view God and our rejection of ex-nihilo creation. Very astute observation! You cut right through to the center of the question. In this way, credal Christianity reminds me of Islam's view of Allah as 'unknowable' in the sense that he is so different from us that we can not comprehend him. We believe God is knowable, but that it requires both copious amounts of grace and considerable spiritual work and character-building to come to know God. Of course, this is not a binary (i.e., knowing God vs. not knowing him) it's more of a spectrum that we believe we are continually progressing upon. That is, we believe our relationship with God is dynamic, and we are ever more or less connected with him depending on how well our choices align us to him. This theology stems from our belief that all human beings are the literal spiritual offspring of God. The belief being that Jesus Christ is the only begotten in the flesh, but all of us are spiritually begotten sons and daughters of the Father.

[@suem6004]

The Bible is clear. God the Father. Only Begotten Son. Holy Spirit. Literally that. Plus theophany of Joseph Smith with the Father literally beside the Son and acknowledging him as HIS Son. That ends 2000 years of debate. Done. I think it is less that God is 'lesser' for LDS than humans are higher than other creeds say. Humans as literal spirit sons and daughters. Like Father, like children. Joint-heirs with Christ sort of thing. That is perfectly reasonable, rational, biblical to LDS. Trinity three headed one body monster is not biblical. Literally it is not found in the Bible. Vs LDS Social trinity is found in the Bible. Smith was a profound prophet and visionary. Time for creedal Christians to trust in the Bible and not in man made councils. The trinity is a pagan concept. Plenty of ancient cultures had three headed deities for iconography. That translated to the new Christian converts from paganism. Pagan iconography for pagan converts.

[@brendamartin3444]

As a former Catholic, it was the first vision that changed my entire paradigm… just like Joseph, Mary and Jesus are three individuals, but members of one family, being one, acting as one to bring to pass the plan of Heavenly Father, this helped me to understand the truth the first vision states The Godhead is literally a family “business” a father and two sons organization, three distinct individuals working as one, as a family unit, as a Godhead unit, acting as one to bring to pass the plan of Heavenly Father…

[@cm4nxd]

@@suem6004I think it is more likely that pagan traditions were based on the truth of the nature of God + being changed over time and twisted away from it. Ie Their ancestors knew about the trinity / godhead whatever you want to call it, and overtime it was corrupted.

[@ExtraMedium-]

@@JoneThePwnOne aspect of this discussion that hasn’t been mentioned is that of a tangible flesh and bone body. One difference between God the father and pre-nativity Jesus was a body. In order for Christ to choose to suffer and die for us was the ability to feel physical pain (have nerve endings). After resurrection, it was important to Christ to show his apostles that he wasn’t merely a spirit by inviting them to touch him and watch him eat food. He didn’t leave behind a body after the Ascension (that we know of). All of this begs the questions: does the Father then also have a tangible body? Are our bodies more than just temporary vessels to be discarded after death? I think this is an important aspect when discussing the nature of the Godhead/Trinity.

[@shireecox122]

Didn’t Jesus also tell His Apostles to “be one, even as my Father and I are one”? How could the Apostles warp themselves into one being? They couldn’t physically do it, obviously. Adam and Eve were also commanded to be one flesh. They could do that physically through procreation, but they were still two separate individuals. It actually makes total sense, that God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are separate, individuals, yet are one in their purpose.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

We are One because we have the Holy Spirit that makes us One like the Father and Son who are united in the Holy Spirit as One God !

[@zionmama150]

5:51 that’s latter-day saint belief… Jeff just described our belief in God. The problem is semantics between these groups. Thank you for this conversation, Jeff and Thoughtful Faith.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

Your trithesism isn't trinitarian theology and the three persons of the trinity are One Essence : not separate gods One only in purpose! It's a massive difference and your Godhead is a heresy! Thus a counterfeit church!

[@MrDaddyofseven]

Agreed. Take that diagram they showed and if you put the word Godhead in the middle it is 100% the same belief.

[@MrDaddyofseven]

@@davidjanbaz7728 if they were of one essence, why would Christ NOT know the day or the hour of His return. Only God the father knows that info. Two essences. Separate beings that have become "one in purpose and perfectly unified" in the same way Jesus asked his apostles to be.

[@ksanofsky6]

@@davidjanbaz7728 Hey David, go troll somewhere else....Some people are trying to find common ground and you're just being disagreeable.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

@@MrDaddyofseven Separate beings aren't One God: an Oxymoron statement: and Jesus was limited by his humanity from knowing all that God knows only during his lifetime because the Holy Spirit was acting through him in power even to heal the woman with the blood affliction because she touched Jesus clothes without his awareness and Power went out and healed her. He didn't know what happened there too : until he asked. Unless the Father wanted the Holy Spirit to reveal future knowledge to Jesus during his earthly life but didn't and so Jesus doesn't know everything God is capable of knowing because of the limitations of our human brain. Jesus did develop in his humanity from a baby to adulthood : he obviously didn't know as much as a baby: that didn't make Jesus less of God did it?

[@rowberryfamily5981]

Good, honest, disarming conversation. It is interesting how far the old church went to distance itself from the polytheism of the day while wrestling with its own version of polytheism. It is also interesting how some of the names for God in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) are plural. The main reason I see it as important is because it factors into the overall plan of salvation and into the family of God.

[@daviddrysdale8882]

One! The Savior told his disciples to be one! One in purpose! I think of Stephen being stoned and looking up, seeing Jesus Christ standing on the right hand of God!

[@GwPoKo]

I was surprised Jacob didn't bring up Stephen's account! Maybe he will in the longer video though.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

The Holy Spirit's indwelling makes Christians One in God's family as being adopted into the Eternal family of God. It's much more than just purpose!

[@theeternalsbeliever1779]

And notice, Stephen didn't see Christ standing along side the Father and the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit is indeed a God Being as trinitarains zealously believe, then why didn't Stephen see it there or even mention it as being present among that group of God Beings?

[@lauramccann18]

Even if as humans we now can't understand God's mysteries, it doesn't mean we can't at all or He doesn't want us to, because: "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him." and "For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad." and "Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and show thee great and mighty things, which thou knowest not."

[@lancepickett]

I love this discussion, and the civil discourse in such a respectful manner. One thing people don’t realize is the actual doctrine of the Trinity wasn’t formalized until almost 350 years after Christ during the Council of Constantinople (381 CE). Up until that time it was largely a theological and philosophical idea being debated to address the conflicting realities of Jesus and his relationship with the Father. It feels like because the doctrine was established by a group guys in a room, the rest of history had to forcefully explain it in a “mysterious” way that we don’t comprehend because it’s so beyond our understanding… when the reality is that a bunch of scholars and church leaders back in 380 CE decided that made sense and the rest of Christianity is stuck with something they have to explain because it is so ingrained into their doctrines. But at the end of the day, it a good thing our salvation doesn’t depended on believing a concept that we humans will never come even close to understanding, right?

[@ajv7575]

🤯nope. Doesn’t make sense. It’s not complicated. God wants us to understand, not confuse us. This is why we needed the restoration.

[@John-sx3mp]

A great conversation. There was no, "You cannot be a Christian unless..." from the trinitarian, which was nice. As a latter-day saint I hear two things from trinitarians that are hard to square, the first of which he said, (1) our finite selves may not be able to comprehend God, so we do our best with the trinity (mystery) and (2) you are not a Christian unless you believe in the incomprehensible trinity. But, as I said, I didn't hear any of (2) here.

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

Here’s my take on the trinity: To clarify, I believe in the Godhead, not the Trinity. I like to think of the Godhead like an actor and his two understudies all portraying Hamlet. There is only one character named Hamlet, and as far as the play is concerned, all three actors are the one true Hamlet. Their words and deeds are always the same. You could almost even say they are practically three beings as one person. God is much the same way: there is One True God, and that God is the Father. Jesus and the Holy Ghost stand in the place of God, representing him, so you can also say that they are God too. Now the trinity is the inverse of this. It says God is three persons in one being. Like Gollum and Smeagol, multiple personalities sharing a body; three who’s but one what. But that distinction almost immediately breaks down when you try to use it to actually explain scripture. Beyond that, this usage of persons and beings in no corresponds to anything we can observe in reality. Being a human being is what makes you a specific person. As people use them today, the words “person” and “being” are nonsense terms with no concrete line between them, and if you press a trinitarian, they cannot define the terms beyond what I’ve already said. Ultimately they will cop out and say it’s a mystery beyond human comprehension, and that you cannot say what God is, only what he isn’t. This goes against scripture which says that we can clearly understand the Godhead through observation of the reality around us. (Romans 1:19-20) so the trinity, this concept that doesn’t correspond to any aspect of rational reality and is beyond human comprehension, is disqualified by scripture. Now even if we grant the idea that the nature of God is beyond us mere mortals, the trinity still doesn’t hold up. Pay close attention. There is a very important difference between something being beyond our comprehension because it is beyond our capacity, versus being incomprehensible because it goes against rationality. I can’t comprehend the 4th dimension because it’s beyond my capacity, but I can still approach it by extrapolating from the principles of the first three dimensions using math and logic (which is in line with Romans 1:19-20). However, a married bachelor is incomprehensible for an entirely different reason. I fully understand the component parts of marriage and bachelors, I just can’t reconcile the contradiction because it goes against rationality. There is nothing wrong with saying that God is beyond us in the first sense. I have no problem with someone claiming God is a 4th dimensional being. But God cannot be incomprehensible in the second sense because God is the fountainhead of rationality, if he, the source of logic, were to embody the illogical, he would be a God of confusion and a house divided against itself, which cannot stand. (Matthew 12:25, 1 Cor. 14:33) So how did rational people arrive at this irrational idea? Well let’s look at the original words used to describe the trinity. The technical terms for three persons in one being is three hypostases of one Ousia. And the idea of three persons sharing one substance is called Homoousia. Where do Christians get these idea from? They’ll tell you it’s from the Bible, but the terms trinity, homoousia, etc. do not appear in the Bible. Rather, the trinity can objectively be shown to derive from Greek philosophy, and not early Judeo-Christian theology. The God of the Trinity is much closer to the immaterial unmoved mover believed by Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, than the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob who called his followers “those who wrestle with God.” The terms hypostasis and ousia are terms prominent in the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle. In fact, Plato says that the Platonic forms of platonism are the definition of ousia/essence. And hypostasis meant the underlying substance of things. Literally Hypo=under + stasis=station/stance, so hypostasis is a direct one-to-one translation of sub-stance. Meaning that when you say God is three hypostases/persons in one ousia/being, you are actually literally saying that God is three substances of one platonic form, which is ironically actually closer to the doctrine of the Godhead that I’ve been promoting, which is that God is three separate beings, all acting as the united person/character/blueprint of God. So the early Christians, who did not believe in the modern trinity, tried to use the contemporary philosophical language of their day to describe God the way I am describing him, but that doctrine of the Godhead was obscured by the influence of the philosophies of men corrupting the original doctrine over the centuries. (Colossians 2:8-10) In fact, I can prove that the term Hypostasis used to refer to the substance of God, rather than the person, in the context of the trinity. In the original text of the Nicene creed (which invented the trinity) it says that “anyone who claims Christ is a separate hypostasis from the Father is made anathema.” Meaning that according to the original formulation, the modern rendering of the trinity as three hypostases/persons in one ousia/being, is wrong. It was only later on that hypostasis came to mean person instead of substance, and the trinity got inverted into what we have today. If the history doesn’t convince you, then I will show how the trinity re-defines the clear meaning of the words of scripture. I challenge anyone to show me any passage in scripture that teaches homoousia-the idea that God is one in substance-that could not very easily be understood to mean that God is one in will and purpose instead. On the other hand, I can point to several passages that not only make it clear that God is one in purpose, but also preclude the idea that he is one in substance. John 17:20-23 shows that all believers can become ONE with Jesus and the Father IN THE SAME MANNER as they are one with EACH OTHER. Romans 8:16-17 says much the same thing by calling us joint-heirs with Christ glorified together. How can Jesus be an heir of the Father if they are the same being, what could Jesus inherit from the Father that he doesn’t already have? And how could we also be heirs to that type of oneness? Furthermore, how can Jesus be begotten by the Father if he is the Father: can a man conceive himself? The baptism of Jesus also shows all three persons in different places and forms. Jesus in the water, the Holy Spirit as a dove, and the Father is heaven. The same thing happens again at Stephen’s martyrdom. The scripture itself supports the Godhead over the Trinity.

[@mycatwould]

Love this explanation. Very clear and well-supported. I’ve never heard the actor analogy, but that makes a lot of sense. Thanks!

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

@John Cline I know it’s not a perfect analogy, but because the trinity is inherently illogical, a fitting analogy does not exist. That’s what I was explaining in paragraph 3&4. Do you have a better analogy? I think this comedy skit by a Protestant does a good job of showing why all analogies of the trinity ultimately break down: m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/gYKvl5qXitSEedk

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

@@gordianknot9595 Yep, another piece of the puzzle.

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

​@John Cline I understand what the term Godhead means. And I think it fits with my understanding. They are three beings that share the same nature/blueprint of godliness or godhood. Almost like they are of the same essence/ousia/platonic form. In my comment I immediately frame and define what I mean by Godhead and Trinity and how those models differ, so no one would misunderstand me. And I use Godhead because that’s the word the Church of Jesus Christ uses to describe its teaching of how God is 3 in 1, if Latter-Day Saints commonly used another word, I would use that other word. I’m aware that Godhead is a Biblical term and that other Christians sometimes mean something different by it, but that doesn’t mean I can’t also use it to refer to my model. Especially because the most common connotation of the word Godhead is almost synonymous with the term trinity, but while the trinity is associated with the formulations of the ecumenical creeds, the term Godhead doesn’t carry that baggage, and that is precisely the technical distinction I wish to establish. It would be like telling a Calvinist they can’t use the term pre-destination to describe their theology of predeterminism, because predestination is a biblical term that other Christians have understood differently for centuries. Or vice-versa, it would strange to tell a Christian they can’t say something like “I believe in pre-destination, but not Calvinism,” when pre-destination can also carry a distinctly non-Calvinist meaning, despite its typical association with their theology. If you have a better name for my model that would be readily accepted, understood, and recognizable to Latter-Day Saints and others in understanding and referring to our theology, I’m open to suggestions. However I think the term Godhead is already too functional, ubiquitous, and descriptive a name among Latter Day Saints to attempt to rebrand it.

[@joshua.snyder]

🔥💨

[@tracyshutler7296]

As an Lds member my explanation of the God head is they are three separate beings VS but 1 in purpose

[@johnrowley310]

MY MY MY let the matter rest on your explanation...

[@TheJanesaw]

This was awesome, just trying to understand one another

[@danascully7358]

This was a FANTASTIC conversation!!

[@LeaSaSuEntertainment]

I love that in the Lord's Restored gospel, we are taught about who each divine personage is and that we are created in the image of God and HE is our Heavenly Father. I love knowing that I have this personal relationship with HIM and HE knows what I'm going through and will help me. It's a more pleasant experience seeing God as my Heavenly Father and that HE knows what is best for me.

[@johnrowley310]

I love the gospel of old that was delivered once to the saints. No restoration of original truth...

[@rhamsesmartinez5007]

Latter-Day Saints live under the illusion that their understanding of God or the Godhead is much more logical, rational, simple, and easier to understand than the Trinity. They view it as one of the “plain and precious things” restored. I too used to glory and rejoice over this perceived simplicity. However, LDS theology on the Godhead is not as simple as the vast majority of Latter-Day Saints are made to believe. It has major issues, as I eventually came to realize. 1) LDS scripture teaches that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are all infinite (Alma 34:10,14; D&C 20:17, 28). However, there cannot be more than one infinite being. Infinity means “limitless or without bounds.” An infinite being must occupy all of space and time, otherwise, it would have bounds. So, if two beings are truly infinite, they would be completely indistinguishable and occupy the same space, effectively becoming ONE entity. Otherwise, one “infinite” being would inherently limit the other, making neither truly infinite by definition. Therefore, for God, the Father, and Jesus Christ to both be infinite, the LDS definition of “infinite” must be modified to mean something else other than truly infinite. 2) Along the same lines, a created being, by definition, CANNOT be infinite. An infinite being necessitates to have always existed in both space and time. According to Latter-Day Saints, however, Jesus, the Son, was created both spiritually and physically by the Father. He, therefore, cannot be an infinite being. Latter-Day Saints may argue that the spirit and body of Jesus Christ are made up of intelligences and matter that have always existed. But that still would only make him eternal in time, not infinite in the true sense of the word. The spirits and bodies of those who will inherit the telestial kingdom are also made of eternal intelligence and matter, but that does not mean they are infinite beings. True infinite beings CANNOT be created because a created being requires a beginning, and an infinite being CANNOT have a beginning. 3) Lorenzo Snow taught, “As man now is, God once was.” Joseph Smith also taught the God “was once as one of us” and that he is an “exalted man.” If there was a point in time in which the Father was not God, then he is not infinite either. Therefore, the LDS Father and Son are both finite beings; one finite being created by another finite being. 4) Another logical question that arises is: Who was the Father’s God, and was he also a mortal man at some point?” If so, how far back does this lineage go? If Jesus became a God by the power of His Father, and the Father was in turn made a God by the power of his God, this means there is a lineage of gods who are all reliant on the god before them for their godhood. But if a god can only be made by another god, how was the first God made? What entity or power sustains the godhood of all these gods across time. In other words, where do all these gods ultimately derive their power and godhood from? 5) The LDS church also teaches that the Father, through obedience progressed, advanced, and eventually received his exaltation. Additionally, Alma 42:13, 15, 22, and 25 clearly teaches that for God to be a “perfect, just God, and a merciful God also,” he has to “appease the demands of justice.” Otherwise, he “would cease to be God.” It is clear, then, that Latter-Day Saints believe that the Father is NOT omnipotent, sovereign, or infinite. He is bound by laws that are above him and that precede him in time. He is not the creator of all that exists nor the author of the moral law. His godhood is wholly dependent on external powers, laws, and beings to which/whom he must submit. This is hardly the meaning of “I AM who I AM” (Exodus 3:14) or “I am the first and I am the last” (Isaiah 44:6). Nor does it align with the psalmist’s words when he said, “Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God” (Psalm 90:2) and “our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases” (Psalm 115:3). It is, therefore, evident that the LDS “plain and precious” understanding of the Godhead, comes with a lot of baggage. It may sound pretty and appealing upfront, but the backend is full of questions, contradictions, and confusion- a lot of which were not included here. I think Latter-Day Saints, need to take some time to think and ponder about the complications that also arise with the belief in a created Godhead. The Trinitarian view and the LDS view of God each have their own set of complications. As a former devout Latter-Day Saint, I prefer the Trinitarian view.

[@cadenza5253]

Great conversation!

[@Whatiftheresmore1314]

Thank you Jacob, how I love the Restoration. How thankful I am for Joseph Smith and his humble seeking. Now we know the true understanding that God is our loving Father and Christ is His beloved Son and they are like us in image. ❤️☀️

[@rhamsesmartinez5007]

Latter-Day Saints live under the illusion that their understanding of God or the Godhead is much more logical, rational, simple, and easier to understand than the Trinity. They view it as one of the “plain and precious things” restored. I too used to glory and rejoice over this perceived simplicity. However, LDS theology on the Godhead is not as simple as the vast majority of Latter-Day Saints are made to believe. It has major issues, as I eventually came to realize. 1) LDS scripture teaches that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are all infinite (Alma 34:10,14; D&C 20:17, 28). However, there cannot be more than one infinite being. Infinity means “limitless or without bounds.” An infinite being must occupy all of space and time, otherwise, it would have bounds. So, if two beings are truly infinite, they would be completely indistinguishable and occupy the same space, effectively becoming ONE entity. Otherwise, one “infinite” being would inherently limit the other, making neither truly infinite by definition. Therefore, for God, the Father, and Jesus Christ to both be infinite, the LDS definition of “infinite” must be modified to mean something else other than truly infinite. 2) Along the same lines, a created being, by definition, CANNOT be infinite. An infinite being necessitates to have always existed in both space and time. According to Latter-Day Saints, however, Jesus, the Son, was created both spiritually and physically by the Father. He, therefore, cannot be an infinite being. Latter-Day Saints may argue that the spirit and body of Jesus Christ are made up of intelligences and matter that have always existed. But that still would only make him eternal in time, not infinite in the true sense of the word. The spirits and bodies of those who will inherit the telestial kingdom are also made of eternal intelligence and matter, but that does not mean they are infinite beings. True infinite beings CANNOT be created because a created being requires a beginning, and an infinite being CANNOT have a beginning. 3) Lorenzo Snow taught, “As man now is, God once was.” Joseph Smith also taught the God “was once as one of us” and that he is an “exalted man.” If there was a point in time in which the Father was not God, then he is not infinite either. Therefore, the LDS Father and Son are both finite beings; one finite being created by another finite being. 4) Another logical question that arises is: Who was the Father’s God, and was he also a mortal man at some point?” If so, how far back does this lineage go? If Jesus became a God by the power of His Father, and the Father was in turn made a God by the power of his God, this means there is a lineage of gods who are all reliant on the god before them for their godhood. But if a god can only be made by another god, how was the first God made? What entity or power sustains the godhood of all these gods across time. In other words, where do all these gods ultimately derive their power and godhood from? 5) The LDS church also teaches that the Father, through obedience progressed, advanced, and eventually received his exaltation. Additionally, Alma 42:13, 15, 22, and 25 clearly teaches that for God to be a “perfect, just God, and a merciful God also,” he has to “appease the demands of justice.” Otherwise, he “would cease to be God.” It is clear, then, that Latter-Day Saints believe that the Father is NOT omnipotent, sovereign, or infinite. He is bound by laws that are above him and that precede him in time. He is not the creator of all that exists nor the author of the moral law. His godhood is wholly dependent on external powers, laws, and beings to which/whom he must submit. This is hardly the meaning of “I AM who I AM” (Exodus 3:14) or “I am the first and I am the last” (Isaiah 44:6). Nor does it align with the psalmist’s words when he said, “Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God” (Psalm 90:2) and “our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases” (Psalm 115:3). It is, therefore, evident that the LDS “plain and precious” understanding of the Godhead, comes with a lot of baggage. It may sound pretty and appealing upfront, but the backend is full of questions, contradictions, and confusion- a lot of which were not included here. Latter-Day Saints, therefore, need to take some time to think and ponder about the complications that also arise with believing in a created Godhead. The Trinitarian view and the LDS view of God each have their own set of complications. As a former devout Latter-Day Saint, I prefer the Trinitarian view.

[@Whatiftheresmore1314]

@ My testimony and relationship with Jesus Christ has exploded and deepened as I have learned the true nature of God our Father, and His Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost. The Restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ has been one of the greatest blessings in my life. It has brought me to Jesus Christ in ways I never dreamed possible. Sure, it’s not for everyone, but it has changed everything for me. ❤️☀️

[@keithmillett4728]

When Christ was on the cross he said Father let this cup pass from me , never less thy will be done not mine. In my mind this clearly demonstrates that Jesus Christ is separate from God the father. I am so glad I don’t have to confuse this simple scripture with some strange explanation from the Trinity doctrine. This scripture is so plain and simple. Same with Jesus saying My God, My God why has thou forsaken me? Or Father forgive them for they know not what they do. So simple so plain.

[@debbiepenorpencil5896]

to me. . .understanding the essence of God, His being/non-being is less important that creating a relationship, understanding what He wants of me, and following His commandments. Sometimes we get hung up where we should not. If God wanted everyone to perfectly understand this point He would make it crystal clear to everyone. However, He has said that if you want to know, you can ask. I find that when I think of God as my Father and Jesus as His son, I find it's much more relatable, and I do feel closer to both of them.

[@crazyaboutcards]

Team Godhead! The Trinity makes absolutely no sense to me. Thanks for the podcast! I love hearing the discussion.

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

Faith and works aren’t mutually exclusive either, and yet you wouldn’t think it strange to see people picking sides in that debate.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

@@KnuttyEntertainmentTrue Faith is the primary cause of Good Works that lead to Salvation: adding works to Faith as two primary causes of Salvation is totally different and both the Roman Catholic and your interpretations are false.

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

@@davidjanbaz7728 Very good David, thank you for proving my point. Here, you get a cookie.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

@@KnuttyEntertainment that you Gospel is wrong again or that only True Faith can produce works of righteousness but even these works are NOT our basis of Salvation. TITUS 3:5. My pleasure!

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

@@davidjanbaz7728 My comment made two points: A) Works and faith aren’t mutually exclusive. B) People still pick sides between the two. And right on cue you couldn’t help but swoop in to demonstrate exactly what I meant.

[@jimbrandin6454]

In Genisis, God said " let us make man in our image."

[@royperkins28]

Awesome presentation

[@darlenemartim9972]

Great people discussing yeah!

[@SimonDaumMusic]

I love the quote of Joseph: “If men do not comprehend the character of God, they do not comprehend themselves..." That actually makes sense to me, for in the Bible GOD is also equivalent to TRUTH and LOVE, so if there is no way to comprehend God, there is also no way to comprehend any of the other. But in the Bible we are invited to know God: John 17:3 "Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." Mayby even more beautifully is 1 John 4:8 “He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.” ... and since in John 4:18 it talks about the invitation towards us to "be perfect in love", I feel there is a way to perfectly love, understand truth and know God, for it seems they are all tied together.

[@DavidDrysdale-c4p]

As Elder Holland has taught, "The Father and the Son are ONE in every conceivable way. However, they are separate and distinct beings!

[@ceajaye2657]

Great discussion! I wish that the last question was: do you believe a correct view of this mystery is a salvivic issue? I’d be curious to hear each one’s answer.

[@SeanLayton]

Sweet, looking forward to this!

[@tazdelp1248]

Thanks Jacob! Discovered you on Midnight Mormons and appreciate how you eloquently defend your faith. Thank you for your work! Subscribed

[@treykellypodcast]

I love the way you framed our view of the Godhead.

[@spen7899]

What people misunderstand is that we believe Jesus and the Holy Spirit are subservient to Heavenly Father, so we reject co-equality.

[@johnrowley310]

You do not believe Jesus is god... Read John 1 please...

[@westonwoodbury3011]

“Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” Out of Gods mouth showing other lesser gods exist! Stephen before he was stoned sees God and Jesus on his right. Christ says you are gods, there is good scholarship that has come out showing polytheism is correct. Both of those dude’s already now this, so excited to hear this enlightening stuff.

[@duncanbelem]

Isn't it interesting that we spend so much arguing about this and we believe nearly the same thing. The same goes with grace and works.

[@homesteadingbarndo]

To protestant Christians like me this is a big deal because the nature of Jesus and who he claims to be and how salvation is attained.

[@duncanbelem]

@@homesteadingbarndo to me Christ is full of grace. To me also our character is much more important than our misunderstandings. As a father I am a lot more graceful to a child who didn't understand than a child chooses to do wrong. And many Christians have misunderstanding about this very thing, go ask the average Christian about the nature of God, and likely it would be different then the "correct" interpretation. I don't believe in a God who condemns people because of misunderstandings. And No human being understands all truths. We know nothing compared to God. And I believe in a God who loves the humble followers. And those who can sometime admit they don't understand all things, even about the nature of God. I also believe we are made is His image. Which literally means we are made to be like Him. Even though now we are so imperfect. We are his "offspring" as Paul puts it. This is why were can't worship a golden calf, because we know we are his offspring and we look like him, also as Paul said.

[@homesteadingbarndo]

@duncanbelem if you want to talk about this I'm open to it

[@GwPoKo]

As I have been listening to these types of conversations and also listening to some near-death experiences (I know. We have to take them with a grain of salt), it's interesting to me that many people who die and experience the other side will say that there are three distinct and separate beings (God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit) but they are more one than we could understand

[@davidjanbaz7728]

They are distinct but not separate beings as they are of One Eternal Essence !

[@nute742]

@@davidjanbaz7728 So if we went to heaven, and sat down for dinner with Jesus. And then God Showed up too (could we see both of them together but separate and give both of them a separate hug)? Just curious on peoples take on this matter.

[@DavidDrysdale-c4p]

Pastor Jeff says, "The trinity drives me insane!" I think we can agree on that!

[@johnrowley310]

The lies of Smith and his church stole the salvation of all my relatives. I am more than mad...

[@katelynmoreno1804]

Latter-day Saints don’t need to reconcile anything. That’s the beauty of the first vision. We aren’t trying to make scriptures fit into a very specific box. We have the spirit to witness the truth of the first vision and all scripture in the Bible that clearly supports the first vision.

[@tmdsls]

Psalm 82 “1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods… 6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. 7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.”

[@JanvsBoxGaming]

SLudos y bendiciones desde Lima Perú

[@davidallred2947]

The Planner. The Effector. The Teacher.

[@Elpatoloco2011]

My grandparents were methodist and Baptist..... But even they agreed that the LDS view seemed more reasonable and logical of 3 separate beings rather than Trying to cram 3 individuals into one being.

[@magitekarms60]

Excellent and edifying conversation. Well done, both of you. That being said, it's interesting how the protestant notion of the trinity is still so deeply rooted in the very Catholic creeds of the early centuries. Or do protestants reconcile that differently?

[@PrairieChristianOutreach]

Thank you Jacob, I appreciate you steel manning the Trinity Theology. My experience has been that most LDS members think of the Trinity in terms of modalism. I appreciate the discussion around the nature of God. My view is that all three members of the God Head share the substance or nature of God but are different persons. This substance is: 1. Eternal 2. Omnipresent 3. Omnipotent 4. Omniscient By its very nature having these shared attributes will make them one in the greatest sense possible and still maintain separate personhood. This is the original and Everlasting Covenant. It is a beautiful theology.

[@boltrooktwo]

I think it is very important to see Jesus Christ as an heir, the Bible uses this language precisely many times. It makes the ministry and the way Jesus lived and loved as genuine and glorious instead of a performative display of dominant power. The way Jesus gives us, when He talks about the Way, is accessible to other beings, not a mystery of the “completely other” which is the used definition of Trinitarian worship. You can see the same method as well when some influential leaders describe the apostles of Jesus as a special class of saint unapproachable by the common person, though they did authoritative and miraculous things in their discipleship and emphasized themselves as children of God.

[@themanflake]

I’m glad they pointed out how similar the Godhead and the trinity are, I’ve always thought that they are almost the same thing with slight differences

[@justinbosley692]

Good introduction video to the LDS concept of God vs the Trinity. You need to make one showing how the LDS Godhead is consistent with the Bible.

[@cjbatesii]

There is a third description: henotheism. There are multiple, but one above all. This is pointed to in Mark 10:18...

[@RurouniTenShins]

Ooh… great show… love this guys series! Edit: this is what’s the worst about the trinitarian Christian view… they say it’s not modalism, while describing basically exact modalism… and then just say it’s a mystery… but with that explanation, the Mormon view could easily encompass the same reconciliation as a mystery.

[@juliebey8240]

Sorry, that discussion still confused me. I do not understand what the other Christian denominations’ theory or belief of the Trinity means. The Godhead as the Latter Day Saints understand it makes much more sense and I am so glad that we have continuing revelation that reinforces it.

[@tylerlloyd83]

The early church after the apostles were gone taught that the relationship between God and Jesus was like a King with a son who is also a king. Over time that belief changed, and the preferred analogy was using a torch to light another torch-you have two torches but in a sense they are made of the same flame. But the key thing to understand is that the church was facing persecution from Rome, which had adopted Greek philosophical presuppositions. In an effort to reduce the persecution the early church began to emphasize what it had in common with Greek philosophy. That gradually became teaching the gospel from a Greek perspective, and eventually understanding the gospel from a Greek perspective. The Bible doesn’t make much of a case for the necessity of there being only a single divine being. That assumption comes from Greek philosophy. It’s the tail that wags the dog of traditional Christianity.

[@johnrowley310]

@@tylerlloyd83 If you believe in more than one god. you would be better off to become Hindu and embrace paganism...

[@rhamsesmartinez5007]

Latter-Day Saints live under the illusion that their understanding of God or the Godhead is much more logical, rational, simple, and easier to understand than the Trinity. They view it as one of the “plain and precious things” restored. I too used to glory and rejoice over this perceived simplicity. However, LDS theology on the Godhead is not as simple as the vast majority of Latter-Day Saints are made to believe. It has major issues, as I eventually came to realize. 1) LDS scripture teaches that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are all infinite (Alma 34:10,14; D&C 20:17, 28). However, there cannot be more than one infinite being. Infinity means “limitless or without bounds.” An infinite being must occupy all of space and time, otherwise, it would have bounds. So, if two beings are truly infinite, they would be completely indistinguishable and occupy the same space, effectively becoming ONE entity. Otherwise, one “infinite” being would inherently limit the other, making neither truly infinite by definition. Therefore, for God, the Father, and Jesus Christ to both be infinite, the LDS definition of “infinite” must be modified to mean something else other than truly infinite. 2) Along the same lines, a created being, by definition, CANNOT be infinite. An infinite being necessitates to have always existed in both space and time. According to Latter-Day Saints, however, Jesus, the Son, was created both spiritually and physically by the Father. He, therefore, cannot be an infinite being. Latter-Day Saints may argue that the spirit and body of Jesus Christ are made up of intelligences and matter that have always existed. But that still would only make him eternal in time, not infinite in the true sense of the word. The spirits and bodies of those who will inherit the telestial kingdom are also made of eternal intelligence and matter, but that does not mean they are infinite beings. True infinite beings CANNOT be created because a created being requires a beginning, and an infinite being CANNOT have a beginning. 3) Lorenzo Snow taught, “As man now is, God once was.” Joseph Smith also taught the God “was once as one of us” and that he is an “exalted man.” If there was a point in time in which the Father was not God, then he is not infinite either. Therefore, the LDS Father and Son are both finite beings; one finite being created by another finite being. 4) Another logical question that arises is: Who was the Father’s God, and was he also a mortal man at some point?” If so, how far back does this lineage go? If Jesus became a God by the power of His Father, and the Father was in turn made a God by the power of his God, this means there is a lineage of gods who are all reliant on the god before them for their godhood. But if a god can only be made by another god, how was the first God made? What entity or power sustains the godhood of all these gods across time. In other words, where do all these gods ultimately derive their power and godhood from? 5) The LDS church also teaches that the Father, through obedience progressed, advanced, and eventually received his exaltation. Additionally, Alma 42:13, 15, 22, and 25 clearly teaches that for God to be a “perfect, just God, and a merciful God also,” he has to “appease the demands of justice.” Otherwise, he “would cease to be God.” It is clear, then, that Latter-Day Saints believe that the Father is NOT omnipotent, sovereign, or infinite. He is bound by laws that are above him and that precede him in time. He is not the creator of all that exists nor the author of the moral law. His godhood is wholly dependent on external powers, laws, and beings to which/whom he must submit. This is hardly the meaning of “I AM who I AM” (Exodus 3:14) or “I am the first and I am the last” (Isaiah 44:6). Nor does it align with the psalmist’s words when he said, “Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God” (Psalm 90:2) and “our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases” (Psalm 115:3). It is, therefore, evident that the LDS “plain and precious” understanding of the Godhead, comes with a lot of baggage. It may sound pretty and appealing upfront, but the backend is full of questions, contradictions, and confusion- a lot of which were not included here. Latter-Day Saints, therefore, need to take some time to think and ponder about the complications that also arise with believing in a created Godhead. The Trinitarian view and the LDS view of God each have their own set of complications. As a former devout Latter-Day Saint, I prefer the Trinitarian view.

[@oshawott4544]

Whenever I hear a description of tbe Trinity, I always find myself thinking "Wait, is that what we believe, but with extra steps?" I always thought I could describe what we believe to a Trinitarian, and they'd never know we didn't believe in the Trinity unless I specified that we didn't.

[@jimbrandin6454]

Christ's great intercessory prayer - He prays to the Father that His apostles and all that believe on Him through their words will become one, as He and the Father are one. John 17

[@LindyLime]

The first time I saw that Trinity triangle I seriously thought "Wait, this is what we believe!" I had to think about it to pinpoint what the differences actually are.

[@SplinkyWonderful]

This description of the Trinity is exactly what the Book of Mormon teaches. I think this is actually a recently developed explanation of the Trinity. The more you explain the Trinity in a way that makes sense, the more you align with LDS theology.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

LOL 😆 you have all three types of verses in the Book of Mormon 1. Trinitarian 2. Modalism 3. Trithesism Your church teaches Trithesism not Trinitarianism! Most Mormons understand Modalism as what the trinity is and that's not what it is !

[@joeshriver778]

@@davidjanbaz7728 that is the problem, and both have said that even in other Christian religions they make it sound like modalism. For a lot of us in the LDS religion, I believe because the explanation of being three people but one being does not make sense because we equate person and being to mean the same thing. To us it is easier for us to understand it as three people in the same job working for the same purpose. My parents grew up in religions that believed in the trinity and it never made sense to them, but our churches explanation made more sense.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

@@joeshriver778 that's only because of the English usage of person = being : That's not what the Greek terms mean in the original language of the Council of Nicaea. Here is the technical language that isn't confusing like the English. This will relate to the Mormon tritheistic view of the Godhead : " Against the subordinationistic and tritheistic view of Arius, Athanasius and the Council of Nicaea ( A.D. 325) argued the Consubdstantiality of the Father, Son, and Spirit. The Arians viewed the persons as of different Essence ( heteeroousios) and as unlike( anomoios) ; Athanasius held that the persons were of one Essence or Consubstantial ( homoousios ). In order to avoid a tritheism of three essentially coequal gods , the Cappadocians further stipulated that the entire divine( ousia) is indivisibly present in the three ( hypostases) or, more precisely, that the three ( hypostases) are Eternally subsistent relations in one (ousia). I realize this is way over your understanding and is why Mormons are clueless when it comes to the Trinity definition of 3 persons in 1 Essence which is less confusing than the 3 persons in 1 being which is more confusing due to the English equivalent of person with being. There isn't that confusion with the original language of the Council of Nicaea Homoousios = means same substance of One Spiritual Essence and why the three persons are not separate gods only one in purpose.

[@jaromyoung7376]

​@davidjanbaz7728 Sounds like Greek philosophy to me. Specifically neo-platonism, which was very popular when the council at Nicea happened. Iraeneus is rolling over in his grave to see how gnostic the catholic church became

[@kathealey]

I am LDS and we believe in the Bible and the depictions of God and Christ in the Bible Acts 7:55-56 "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God". "Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God". Luke 22:69 "But from now on the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the mighty God”". God wants us to know of his nature.....and the descriptions are pretty clear....at least to me.

[@boltrooktwo]

The pinnacle of Being and person-truth is not singular and dominating but it is family and loving, it is higher and greater to be one with others than it is to be one over others, is the way I understand this issue. We see this pattern in our own lives as evidence, we see the married man with loyal children as greater than the single man who may have other methods of influence over others.

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

In order to be one with others there has to be others to be one with. Without distinction and independence, the unity is meaningless. That to me is one area where the trinity fails. It doesn’t sufficiently distinguish. The best analogy I can come up with for the trinity is multiple personalities sharing a body like Gollum and Smeagol, and even then that’s not truly two persons.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

@@KnuttyEntertainment your ignorance is underwhelming ! The trinity is the most unique relationship in the universe and is why: your both Spirit and Physical unified in one being or Essence. Can you separate what you are into separate things; absolutely NOT. We are created in the image of the Trinitarian God: not a trithesism God.

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

@@davidjanbaz7728 If my ignorance is underwhelming, yours is overwhelming. How is the trinity both a unique relationship, and yet its image is also reflected in all mankind? Is it unique or ubiquitous? If the spiritual and physical are unified in one essence, how can you say that God is a non-physical spirits or that we exist as ghosts after after our physical bodies die? I thought it could not be separated? Are you a monist or a dualist? If the universe carries the expression of its creator, how come the trinitarian nature of that creator cannot ascertained from reality: If God is truth and that truth is made manifest as we observe the world around us, (Romans 1:19-20 says as much) how come we cannot observe anything reminiscent of trinitarianism in reality? Case in point: please provide any suitable analogy of what the trinity is. If nothing in reality can be used as an example to create an suitable analogy, then reality cannot be analogous to God, and therefore God cannot be real. I can easily think of other things beyond our capacity that two people can still independently arrive at through observation of reality, such as the 4th dimension. We know it exists, we know what it is, we can explain and demonstrate it with reality, we just can’t observe and comprehend it.

[@nute742]

Interesting Video, and good points about the "Trinity" (Great civil discussion - and It would be great to see more). So a few questions here about Trinitarianism (1) So if in the Trinity each member is separate (God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost), then why would that not be considered "Polytheism" (and why would that be bad thing, even though they are one in purpose?) Does that word connotate something bad? Because if They are separate, can they not be Gods separately (or only one God together)? However maybe the way the Trinity is explained is really more about a "Calling" (or force) vs an Actual Being (like describing Jesus, or God (the Father) or the Holy Ghost). Unless of course they are all connected (maybe by the "force" like in star wars, or universal law, etc in a way and that is the God Force, and that is what is Called "One God" However each one does have their own unique callings and roles to fulfill (from what is taught in the bible). Jesus was sent to die, God sent him to the world to be the Savior of Mankind, the Holy Spirit confirms the "Truth of All Things"). So They are all "one in purpose" but separate in nature. So my view is trinitarianism may be somewhat trickier to explain to someone vs say the LDS viewpoint which also makes sense and may be somewhat more comprehensible (even from a biblical view). However the bible makes good points for both. So it sounds like it would be both! (God has a Body, Intelligence and Spirit = Triune Being) as the scriptures would say (God is Love, God is Intelligence, God is Spirit, etc). Again much of our understandings or "definitions" may be more nuanced or expressed through semantics or different understanding and even meanings of the same words (vs actually what is). The fallibility of Human languages can do that sometimes. Even how we express our knowledge can be limited (vs the Adamic Language which was more proficient) However My "Big" question - to anyone that believes in the Trinity concept (with the utmost respect ) would be this (2) If you were in Heaven, could you sit down with both Jesus, God the Father at the "Same Time" at the Table for Dinner) looking at "each" individual" Give them both hugs, shake their hands, etc? (3) Would Jesus have a body, but not God (the Father) ? Again the apostle Stephen himself said he saw "both" God the Father and the Son (Jesus, the son) sitting at the right hand of God (biblical scripture). (4) Also they walked in the Garden of Eden - with Adam. (5) Also Joseph Smith saw them together (separate). Also many "other" examples (like Jesus Baptism, or the Mount of Transfiguration, etc - had them acting separate and doing separate things). (5) Again I believe God works in patterns. (6) For Agency to have place, there must be "separation" So you need more than one person so as to testify about the other (do the "others will" and not your own, as Jesus said) This would hold true to more than "one witness" (like the Bible and Book of Mormon) In the mouth of "2 or more" witnesses the truth will be established. So I'm not sure why it would not be a good thing to have Both Jesus and God the Father present together side by side at the same time? The scriptures say we were made in the "express" image of Him (our Heavenly Father). I guess in the end almost all scriptures can be interpreted differently (amongst most all denominations and sects). Then it can be hard to make a point sometimes (from an authoritative perspective) on being the one with the "correct" version. Maybe that's were personal study and witness come in (for those seeking answers). However maybe for now it's more important to know the spirit of the law (vs always knowing all the nuts and bolts - letter, etc ) on how things operate (I guess we all have to operate on faith, love, tolerance) until we receive additional light and knowledge while we wait. Which can be a good thing - as it helps us to have faith at the same time. Anyway food for thought and good discussion! God Bless :)

[@daviddrysdale8882]

And I would say that our understanding of God, the Godhead, need not be categorized as mystery!😊

[@johnrowley310]

Why would it ? You will soon be an LDS god.

[@rhamsesmartinez5007]

I think it should. There a lot of complications with the belief of a created Godhead. What I mean by this is, according to LDS theology, Jesus and the holy ghost were both created by the Father. However, the Father in turn was also created by his God. This creates inconsistencies, or dare I say, mysteries regarding the infinite nature of God.

[@peaceliberty4all]

"Mind splitting, headache inducing idea" describes the concept of the trinity perfectly. Who God is is not supposed to be one of the mysteries as Christ himself said, "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." 3 distinct beings acting as one, this concept was also taught by Jesus when he said a husband and wife, two distinct beings, shall become one. It is not polytheism because we only worship one God, God the father and the three distinct and separate beings act as one.

[@laurenmay2098]

I never heard no Protestant saying that Jesus was praying for himself. He always prayed for his father, whom he said to be God.

[@V3RACITY]

It seems to be that Christian’s attacking Mormons or Mormons attacking Christian’s on this point of doctrine is exactly the type of distraction Satan would want. We have more in common than apart.

[@Mmmmmk247]

Satan has always been about lies and partial truth. Mormons think Christian’s have partial truth and the other way around. That’s why it’s important to help others see. Mormons keep coming back to this idea that people with partial truth will be able to see God when they die and be given a chance to join the church. It’s not biblical so Christian’s think this is your only shot to get it right which is biblical

[@davidjanbaz7728]

It's quite a Grand Canyon and your standing on the other side from us, Christians ! You may think its not significant but any historical Christian would say it actually is the most important thing believing in the Authentic God, Gospel and Jesus!

[@V3RACITY]

I didn’t say it wasn’t a significant difference. It’s a matter of prioritization of the brief time in our mortal state. Would Jesus rather us serve him by wasting time arguing this point of difference or would he rather by fighting against the actual evils that exist all throughout our culture. Side note: The way you formatted your message immediately implies you are someone who is unreasonable.

[@nute742]

Yes, very true indeed. (Great to have discussions though like this) but what you said is right. I think there has been a "new revival" going on lately. (Sorta like in the time of Joseph). Now its on the internet though.

[@nute742]

@@davidjanbaz7728 All that believe in Christ and follow his teachings are Christians. And no matter how hard someone from one religion (or sect or belief systems) wants to qualify or disqualify them from a relationship from Jesus, they can't. (No one has authority to do that). However we can all think what we want too. All things that lead us closer to Christ are good.) Okay food for thought, God bless :)

[@davidjanbaz7728]

YES!

[@Mik-ha-El]

No. The Trinity doesn’t make sense, at least, not Biblical sense. The one God of the Bible (YHWH), expressed with 7,000+ personal singular pronouns, has “raised unto Israel a savior” (Acts 13:17-23), has “glorified His Son” (Acts 3:13) The God of Israel isn’t a son. The God of Israel has a son. That’s the reason why the Trinity doesn’t make sense.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

​@@Mik-ha-El you have it wrong: Jesus was Crucified for claiming Equality with the Jewish God. This Equality comes from the TWO POWERS in HEAVEN israelite theology of the 2nd temple period. Genesis 19:24 has 2 persons of YHWH both R called YHWH God Most High. Thomas says the exact same thing in John 20:28 when he states Jesus is the LORD of me and the God of me.

[@Mik-ha-El]

@@davidjanbaz7728 You brother, are looking at the Bible through a trinitarian lens. Yeshua never claimed equality with YHWH. In the same gospel he says: “My Father is greater than I” “Of my own self I can to nothing, but the Father in me is doing His works.” I did not come on my own accord, but the Father sent me” “The one who is sent is not as great as the one who sent him.” “Father, not my will, but thine be done.” The equality with God that Yeshua had was representational equality. For example, when Moses spoke for God, his words were just as authoritative as if God had spoken them Himself because they were His words. Read the exchange between Yeshua and the Pharisees a little closer and you will see that they are accusing him of claiming Messianic authority which holds the ability to speak authoritatively for almighty YHWH. The “two Powers” idea comes predominantly from Daniel 7, and in that text the “son of man” is NOT equal to almighty YHWH. Just go read it. Bless.

[@stevenhenderson9005]

Being is the state of existence. Each person on earth has their own separate state of existence and that is why you would refer to each person as a separate being. But the Godhead is co-eternally existing together without a beginning or and end making GOD (Father, Son, Holy Ghost) ONE BEING.

[@tiffnickk]

I do wish to hear the answer about who Jesus Prays to in the protestant belief.

[@KimballManner]

Curious: so Jeff said that the Trinity was the best explanation we have for a mysterious topic. Fair enough. My question is whether it’s theoretically possible from the evangelical perspective that someone(s) comes up with a better explanation, given that the Trinity explanation is biblical commentary rather than quoting?

[@BlairRorani]

Listening to this discussion the fundamental difference in belief isn't so much the belief itself, it is what is unique about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: we derive beliefs from revelation to living prophets and apostles rather than an academic study and interpretation of the Bible. At the end of the day what a person believes was usually taught to them by someone else. Either that "teacher" bases their teachings on revelation (LDS) or an academic study and interpretation of the Bible (Protestant religions). Neither is "good/bad" but that seems to be the driver of differences in beliefs about the same thing.

[@matteach2]

Problem I have as LDS are the contradictions. When my ancestors joined the Church BY taught that God was Adam. Now it is just the Adam-God theory. Another is in 3rd Nephi in the BOM, the 12 disciples pray to Jesus. Is it OK, to pray to Jesus sometimes? Then GA's contradict themselves. For example Bruce R. McConkie taught at a BYU talk that we cannot worship Jesus as God, but only the Father. However in his hymn "I Believe in Christ it says: I'll worship him with all my might." The God head is still quite confusing, even within LDS circles. The great thing protestantism has taught me is a nuanced understanding of the Godhead by focusing on God's titles and characteristics and that has increased my faith in God.

[@TimogPadyak]

Wow excited for the full interview love this theological dialogues !!

[@wquon2007]

to my understanding, we do acknowledge there are other Gods, but only one is our Heavenly Father. its like knowing there are other families out there, and yes you have other siblings and a mother, but you only answer to Your father. our older brother is a steward over us, but that does not usurp Dads ultimate authority.

[@keithsherwood5096]

How can we know God and be in relationship with him without fully understanding who he is?

[@Hol0gr4m]

Recently I've noticed that many Sects within Christianity claim that authority rests with the Bible alone and it made me wonder why the Nicene Creed gets a pass. Did the men who wrote it have authority to do so? If so, where did that authority come from? If authority rests with the Bible alone, wouldn't further elaboration 325 years after it was written be contradictory?

[@davidjanbaz7728]

You miss understand the Bible as highest authority: but it's not the only authority in the Christian churches and the Priesthood of all believers is why church councils can form doctrines and creeds. Not sure you know the difference between sects and denominations ?

[@Hol0gr4m]

@@davidjanbaz7728 what you're referring to is Prima Scriptura but some sects believe in Sola Scriptura. Prima Scriptura is the belief that the bible is "first priority" or above all other sources of divine revelation. Sola Scriptura is the belief that the Bible is the only authority, meaning that the canon is closed and there is no more divine revelation based on the assumption that everything necessary for Salvation has already been revealed. I recognize that some sects and denominations believe in Prima Scriptura but I'm referring specifically to those who believe in Sola Scriptura in my original comment. I've seen Sect and Denomination used interchangeably in many online forums. Denomination would be a main group within Christianity (Catholic, Protestant), while a sect would be an "offshoot" smaller group within those larger groups (Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, etc.) I used sect as an umbrella term to refer to all "groups of Christians" but I'm not sure why this explanation is relevant to the original question.

[@billevenhuis6438]

In the next life according to the trinity concept when we come in their presence what will we actual see as the 3 in one God

[@rutherglenroad8109]

When Steven was being put to death for his faith, he looked up to heaven and saw a vision of Christ standing at the right hand of God (Acts 7:56). I'm not sure how this is possible in the context of the Trinity as these persons would have to be seperate.