Reno,
I have read your homepage. You make some interesting points, but your viewpoint resorts to some sophistry.
1. The LDS does not believe that Scripture can be interpreted properly by laymen, but we must resort to prophets in general, and the president (Apostle) in particular.
2. Since the book of Mormon is inspired, but the Bible is only inspired as it is translated properly, I must also do three things:
A. Trust LDS prophets
B. Accept the subjective notion that “I will feel it in my bosom to be so”
C. Believe that revelation is ongoing, so that tomorrow what I believe may be changed (acceptance of black elders, denial of polygamy, the fact that god himself was created and once a man, etc).
So even if I were to believe some of what you said on your homepage, tomorrow the Mormons may change it.
Not sure exactly where you’re coming from. All the scriptures I cited were from the KJV Bible, non from the Book of Mormon. Most of the sources were non LDS. The history cited, for the better part, wasn’t LDS history, nor written by LDS historians.
It was rather a factual discussion on the Trinity & the possible problems w/ the belief therein. Is there anything that you dispute on my home page, other than you apparently don’t subscribe to LDS beliefs in revelation etc.?
My original post to you was simply to show that belief in the Trinity wasn’t as cut & dry as you portrayed it to be.
Have a great week.