“Mormon Christology relegates Christ to a created being, and not the Eternal Diving Person of the Second Person of the Triune God.”
Oh really? At what point in time do you think that we think Christ was not divine? Christ was there with the Father when he said ‘let US make man in OUR image and in OUR likeness’. It was Christ who was the Jehovah of the OT, who appeared to Moses in the burning bush, who was known to them as Jehovah.
“The Trinity was believed and taught from the beginning.”
That’s not what the historical record shows. The idea of there being 3 persons in one being or one substance is not found in the scriptures or earliest Christian writings. In fact it took several councils and many, many years to actually codify it. If it was clearly taught from the start and so widely accepted, it shouldn’t have taken more than one afternoon. It was a matter of hot debate, controversy, and even violent disagreement.
“You are making the mistake of confusing the coining of the term, “trinity”, which codified the doctrine”
No, I’m looking for evidence in the scriptures of the specific ideas in the creeds unique to trinity and not seeing them.
“We have Ignatius, Athenagorus, Polycarp, Justin Martyr and the Church fathers teaching the Triune Nature of God from the Scriptures just as the Apostles did.”
The apostles and the earliest of church fathers did not teach of three persons in one being of one substance. There is overlap between subordinationalism and trinity in that both hold there to be a Father, Son and Holy Ghost as individual persons, and that they are one God, but how they are one is the difference. Statements asserting the ideas common to both can not legitimately be claimed to be statements in support of the trinity, you need statements asserting the unique aspects of it but such statements don’t show up for some time down the road. The article I posted reference many non-Mormon scholars who evaluated what they said and concluded that subordinationalism, NOT the trinity was initially the orthodox view.
“Greek philosophy holds no such concept at all.”
You are harming your credibility.
“Wikipedia is not credible at all, any idiot and most do, can write anything they want there.”
Look a little closer, that wasn’t Wikipedia. Instead of trying to shoot the messenger, deal with the facts.
Uh, when LDS relegated him to the dustbin of the universe; before any named entity in any of the LDS scriptures, there was, according to Joseph Smith, eternal matter (you know, like dust substance).
Oh really? At what point in time do you think that we think Christ was not divine?
Now you are twisting what I said. I did not say Mormons don't claim Jesus is Divine. I said, rightly, that Mormons preach a false jesus who is a created being, with a beginning, who was created as a spirit being by the Mormon father god by having celestian sex with one of his many celestial wives. Please try not to misrepresent what I say.
“The Trinity was believed and taught from the beginning.” That’s not what the historical record shows.
Of course it shows that.
The idea of there being 3 persons in one being or one substance is not found in the scriptures or earliest Christian writings.
Of course it is. The Apostles and the early church believed and taught it. In fact it took several councils and many, many years to actually codify it. If it was clearly taught from the start and so widely accepted, it shouldn’t have taken more than one afternoon. It was a matter of hot debate, controversy, and even violent disagreement.
Only because of the opposition from cults and heretical groups such as the Arians and Gnostics who are the forerunners of Mormonism. See, Mormon heresies are not new at all, Satan keeps recycling the same old lies. “You are making the mistake of confusing the coining of the term, “trinity”, which codified the doctrine” No, I’m looking for evidence in the scriptures of the specific ideas in the creeds unique to trinity and not seeing them. “We have Ignatius, Athenagorus, Polycarp, Justin Martyr and the Church fathers teaching the Triune Nature of God from the Scriptures just as the Apostles did.” The apostles and the earliest of church fathers did not teach of three persons in one being of one substance. There is overlap between subordinationalism and trinity in that both hold there to be a Father, Son and Holy Ghost as individual persons, and that they are one God, but how they are one is the difference. Statements asserting the ideas common to both can not legitimately be claimed to be statements in support of the trinity, you need statements asserting the unique aspects of it but such statements don’t show up for some time down the road. The article I posted reference many non-Mormon scholars who evaluated what they said and concluded that subordinationalism, NOT the trinity was initially the orthodox view. “Greek philosophy holds no such concept at all.” You are harming your credibility. “Wikipedia is not credible at all, any idiot and most do, can write anything they want there.” Look a little closer, that wasn’t Wikipedia. Instead of trying to shoot the messenger, deal with the facts.