Actually I’ve no desire to get into a Bible-bashing debate which hasn’t been resolved for 2,000 years. Both of us could easily quote numerous scriptures to back our disparate views. Even the participants at the Council of Nicea acknowledged that they were going extra-scriptural to reach agreement on something that would counter the threat of Arianism.
My point is that the Doctrine of the Trinity, old and widely-accepted as it is, is merely a paradigm to define God (who is ultimately undefinable anyway) and why is it that those who accept this Trinitarian paradigm over another equally scriptural paradigm have the right to decide that anyone who accepts the second paradigm can’t be properly classified a “Christian”. Mormons have no problem with accepting other denominations as Christian, so why do other so-called “Christian” denominations have problems with Mormons professing to follow the Christ in the scriptures? Mormons do not deny the divinity of Christ, they assert it unapologetically. They believe it when Christ says he sits at the right hand of the Father. Trinitarians believe in a metaphysical three separate beings with one substance. Mormons believe in three separate beings who together comprise the Godhead: God the Father, His Only Begotten Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost. Both views are Biblical, layered with scriptural interpretation. Neither is “un-Christian”. Followers of both paradigms are trying their level best to follow the Savior’s example here and acknowledge Him as their Savior and advocate with the Father.
By the way, this entire discussion began with my comment that Norris was unnecessarily bashing potential allies in his crusade to bring back Christian values. I stand by that assertion. Six million conservatives should not be lightly trashed when you are looking for friends.
The Creed states: “We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father [and the Son],
who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified”. Of course, there are [brackets] around [and the Son] because those at the Council of Nicea could not agree on whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son or only the Son. Of course, that leads to the obvious conclusion that they did not agree on the Father and the Son being one in the same being. So, it is illogical to conclude that the Nicene Creed is the basis for an orthodox or universal understanding of the Trinity. Indeed, it demonstrates that the nature of God and the relationship of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are probably more than we can grasp. They couldn’t figure it out at Nicea so people need to stop pretending they did. The Council of Nicea Solved Nothing on the Nature of the Trinity — the division manifest there still lives on. I just hope that Christ Jesus is merciful upon us all for pretending to understand more than we do.
Finally, it is sad to see people condemn others to hell for not believing in different extra-biblical texts than they believe in. Jesus taught us to be united, to be one, as He is one with the Father. He wants us to be united, not divided over how He and the Father and the Holy Spirit are united. How Satan, the great divider and deceiver, must rejoice when he sees Christians condemning others (especially other believers in Christ) to hell over points that scripture does not answer. Only our judge, Christ Jesus, can determine who goes where.