Who was Jesus praying to in the garden of Gethsemane?
- Thread starter PC123
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
No. But one has to believe what God reveals in His Word. And what does He reveal? For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (1 John 5:7 KJV)
So if you do not believe this, then you do not believe the Bible. And if you do not believe that Jesus is God, then you are not a Christian.
So if you do not believe this, then you do not believe the Bible. And if you do not believe that Jesus is God, then you are not a Christian.
Warning: tangent may be ahead
The exact conundrum generated in the premise of this question just came to me, and I apologize if others might've touched on it at one point or another, and that is that being asked is "a simple question" in seeking the face of an ultra-complex multi-faceted being. After all, considering the complexity of each one of use, who are merely images of God, and the nature of the original language's meaning of 'face' is actually in the plural form 'faces,' and how we are the same as yesterday yet not what we were... and our existential construct of individuals in the totality of a community, even individuals that the (rest of the) community might like to ignore or would rather 'cancel,' ...I am rather hesitant to withdraw individual recognition from any person knowing their affect upon the whole is ineludible (yep, I had to look that up), let alone doing so with regard to God's personage(s?).
Hence, my apprehension at accepting modalism as Matt4 explains it... On the other hand, I had also been apprehensive in the risk of affronting God's identity by ascribing godly status to any other than and thereby making idols is my own image... and so, taking with me this dilemma, naked so to speak before God, I asked if it were to either offend or please Him whether I would ascribe deity to and consider Jesus (that I'd heard and knew of) God. And, upon asking, the answer came in the form of the spirit of peace and joy...and fear and reverence...
Jesus, "Who, existing in the form of God, 'did not consider it robbery' to be equal to God, but emptied Himself taking the form of a servant, being made in human likeness.." This was Jesus, the Son, making himself as lowly, or rather expressing is humble (nature of His) being, rather than Father making Himself the Son, as I see it, although it is true that He begets to the Father in a different relationship whereas Father receives us in Him as His bride...
The exact conundrum generated in the premise of this question just came to me, and I apologize if others might've touched on it at one point or another, and that is that being asked is "a simple question" in seeking the face of an ultra-complex multi-faceted being. After all, considering the complexity of each one of use, who are merely images of God, and the nature of the original language's meaning of 'face' is actually in the plural form 'faces,' and how we are the same as yesterday yet not what we were... and our existential construct of individuals in the totality of a community, even individuals that the (rest of the) community might like to ignore or would rather 'cancel,' ...I am rather hesitant to withdraw individual recognition from any person knowing their affect upon the whole is ineludible (yep, I had to look that up), let alone doing so with regard to God's personage(s?).
Hence, my apprehension at accepting modalism as Matt4 explains it... On the other hand, I had also been apprehensive in the risk of affronting God's identity by ascribing godly status to any other than and thereby making idols is my own image... and so, taking with me this dilemma, naked so to speak before God, I asked if it were to either offend or please Him whether I would ascribe deity to and consider Jesus (that I'd heard and knew of) God. And, upon asking, the answer came in the form of the spirit of peace and joy...and fear and reverence...
Jesus, "Who, existing in the form of God, 'did not consider it robbery' to be equal to God, but emptied Himself taking the form of a servant, being made in human likeness.." This was Jesus, the Son, making himself as lowly, or rather expressing is humble (nature of His) being, rather than Father making Himself the Son, as I see it, although it is true that He begets to the Father in a different relationship whereas Father receives us in Him as His bride...
I don't think any Christian questions that Jesus Christ and the Father have a special relationship. Latterday Saints (Mormons) believe that Jesus Christ is a supreme being / first creation. Other denominations believe in the Trinity doctrine. I don't think either group is being disingenuous, the doctrines are conclusions from the differing interpretations of scripture. It's an interesting problem. I don't think it would correct to discount either group as Christian just because they have different faithbased conclusions of the mysterious relationship between the Son and the Father.
A word describing naming a doctrine does not have to be in the Bible. A church council has authority as we know from the book of Acts.
https://www.calvarychapelboston.com/Biblical Basis Trinity Bowman.pdf
-
1
- Show all
actually, the word of God states we know God by his creation even the eternal Godhead Rom chapter 1.
I never said the Godhead are three beings. Why you say that is my point. The personification of the Holy Spirit and the eternal Son and Self-existent God cannot be fully understood. We know God three ways
His creation, His Word, and a relationship with Christ. Remembering it is God who revealed Himself as distinct in three Coe-equal person's yet all are one. Your 1+1+1=3 3^0=1 is still substandard in fully comprehending all God is. We cannot fully comprehend( to grasp the nature, significance )God.
I never said the Godhead are three beings. Why you say that is my point. The personification of the Holy Spirit and the eternal Son and Self-existent God cannot be fully understood. We know God three ways
His creation, His Word, and a relationship with Christ. Remembering it is God who revealed Himself as distinct in three Coe-equal person's yet all are one. Your 1+1+1=3 3^0=1 is still substandard in fully comprehending all God is. We cannot fully comprehend( to grasp the nature, significance )God.
Hello PC123,
You've left out the fact that God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three persons making up one God.
We have Jesus being baptized and as soon as He came up out of the water, the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove landed on Him. In addition, you have a voice from heaven saying, "This is My Son, with whom I am well pleased." So you have all of the individual persons of the Godhead there in one place at the same time.
We have other examples such as in Rev.5:7 Jesus as the Lamb, walks up and takes the scroll out of the right hand of the Father. So, since we know that Jesus is not taking the scroll out of His own hand, then they are separate entities, but one God.
We have other scriptures such as:
"The Lord said unto my Lord, sit her until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet."
"And the Lord rained fire and sulfur from the Lord out of heaven."
"Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.
"Come, let us go down and confound their language."
Since scripture states that there is only one God and the Father is called God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are called God, then it can only lead to one conclusion, which is, they are individual persons which make up one God.
"In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God."
"Father restore me to the glory I had with you before the world began."
"And Thomas said to Him: 'My Lord and My God!' And Jesus said, 'Thomas, you believe because you have seen. Blessed are those who believe but have not seen.' "
You've left out the fact that God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three persons making up one God.
We have Jesus being baptized and as soon as He came up out of the water, the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove landed on Him. In addition, you have a voice from heaven saying, "This is My Son, with whom I am well pleased." So you have all of the individual persons of the Godhead there in one place at the same time.
We have other examples such as in Rev.5:7 Jesus as the Lamb, walks up and takes the scroll out of the right hand of the Father. So, since we know that Jesus is not taking the scroll out of His own hand, then they are separate entities, but one God.
We have other scriptures such as:
"The Lord said unto my Lord, sit her until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet."
"And the Lord rained fire and sulfur from the Lord out of heaven."
"Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.
"Come, let us go down and confound their language."
Since scripture states that there is only one God and the Father is called God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are called God, then it can only lead to one conclusion, which is, they are individual persons which make up one God.
"In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God."
"Father restore me to the glory I had with you before the world began."
"And Thomas said to Him: 'My Lord and My God!' And Jesus said, 'Thomas, you believe because you have seen. Blessed are those who believe but have not seen.' "
Your position is outstanding and I tend to agree. I am only wondering if we can based on what is in those prayers on what attributes are being displayed. Phil 2 has Jesus as obedient as a human on earth. So, those who think it was his human side are likely taking that in play.
Did Jesus have one will or two wills? If we say one will then the position we both agree on is most likely the safe way to go. If one says Jesus had two wills one Divine and one Human that opens a can of worms I do not want to fish with. Then again, one could say it is an advantage for the two wills position to say that Jesus was tested, tempted as a man.
What Does the Bible Mean by Temptation? https://www.answers.org/theology/is_god_tempted.html
Did Jesus have one will or two wills? If we say one will then the position we both agree on is most likely the safe way to go. If one says Jesus had two wills one Divine and one Human that opens a can of worms I do not want to fish with. Then again, one could say it is an advantage for the two wills position to say that Jesus was tested, tempted as a man.
What Does the Bible Mean by Temptation? https://www.answers.org/theology/is_god_tempted.html
You missed the mark friend,
Philippians 2:5-11
Easy-to-Read Version
Learn From Christ to Be Unselfish
5 In your life together, think the way Christ Jesus thought.
6 He was like God in every way,
but he did not think that his being equal with God was something to use for his own benefit.
7 Instead, he gave up everything, even his place with God.
He accepted the role of a servant, appearing in human form.
During his life as a man,
8 he humbled himself by being fully obedient to God,
even when that caused his death—death on a cross.
9 So God raised him up to the most important place
and gave him the name that is greater than any other name.
10 God did this so that every person will bow down to honor the name of Jesus.
Everyone in heaven, on earth, and under the earth will bow.
11 They will all confess, “Jesus Christ is Lord,”
and this will bring glory to God the Father.
Colossians 2:9
Holman Christian Standard Bible
9 For the entire fullness of God’s nature dwells bodily in Christ,
Protestants do accept the first five or six, maybe eight Councils as Authoritative. We know from the book of Acts that Councils are Authoritative.
Hebrews 1
Easy-to-Read Version
God Has Spoken Through His Son
1 In the past God spoke to our people through the prophets. He spoke to them many times and in many different ways. 2 And now in these last days, God has spoken to us again through his Son. He made the whole world through his Son. And he has chosen his Son to have all things. 3 The Son shows the glory of God. He is a perfect copy of God’s nature, and he holds everything together by his powerful command. The Son made people clean from their sins. Then he sat down at the right side of God, the Great One in heaven. 4 The Son became much greater than the angels, and God gave him a name that is much greater than any of their names.
5 God never said this to any of the angels:
“You are my Son.
Today I have become your Father.”
God also never said about an angel,
“I will be his Father,
and he will be my son.”
6 And then, when God presents his firstborn Son to the world, he says,
“Let all God’s angels worship him.”
7 This is what God said about the angels:
“He changes his angels into winds
and his servants into flaming fire.”
8 But this is what he said about his Son:
“God, your kingdom will last forever and ever.
You use your authority for justice.
9 You love what is right and hate what is wrong.
So God, your God, has chosen you,
giving you more honor and joy than anyone like you.”
10 God also said,
“O Lord, in the beginning you made the earth,
and your hands made the sky.
11 These things will disappear, but you will stay.
They will all wear out like old clothes.
12 You will fold them up like a coat,
and they will be changed like clothes.
But you never change,
and your life will never end.”
13 And God never said this to an angel:
“Sit at my right side
until I put your enemies under your power.”
14 All the angels are spirits who serve God and are sent to help those who will receive salvation.
If you are depending on the regreatible translation of the WatchTower, we know from court records that the Translators can not translate, nor read Biblical Languages.
Hebrews 1
Easy-to-Read Version
God Has Spoken Through His Son
1 In the past God spoke to our people through the prophets. He spoke to them many times and in many different ways. 2 And now in these last days, God has spoken to us again through his Son. He made the whole world through his Son. And he has chosen his Son to have all things. 3 The Son shows the glory of God. He is a perfect copy of God’s nature, and he holds everything together by his powerful command. The Son made people clean from their sins. Then he sat down at the right side of God, the Great One in heaven. 4 The Son became much greater than the angels, and God gave him a name that is much greater than any of their names.
5 God never said this to any of the angels:
“You are my Son.
Today I have become your Father.”
God also never said about an angel,
“I will be his Father,
and he will be my son.”
6 And then, when God presents his firstborn Son to the world, he says,
“Let all God’s angels worship him.”
7 This is what God said about the angels:
“He changes his angels into winds
and his servants into flaming fire.”
8 But this is what he said about his Son:
“God, your kingdom will last forever and ever.
You use your authority for justice.
9 You love what is right and hate what is wrong.
So God, your God, has chosen you,
giving you more honor and joy than anyone like you.”
10 God also said,
“O Lord, in the beginning you made the earth,
and your hands made the sky.
11 These things will disappear, but you will stay.
They will all wear out like old clothes.
12 You will fold them up like a coat,
and they will be changed like clothes.
But you never change,
and your life will never end.”
13 And God never said this to an angel:
“Sit at my right side
until I put your enemies under your power.”
14 All the angels are spirits who serve God and are sent to help those who will receive salvation.
If you are depending on the regreatible translation of the WatchTower, we know from court records that the Translators can not translate, nor read Biblical Languages.
"
Fred Franz Unable to Translate Hebrew
Fred Franz was the leader of the New World Translation (NWT) committee and subsequent president of the Watchtower Society, and the only member of the secret committee to have any training in Hebrew or Greek, limited as it was.
Mr. Franz, under oath in a trial in Scotland in the Scottish Court of Sessions in November, 1954 (Douglas Walsh v. The Right Honorable James Latham Clyde, M.P., P.C., etc., Scotland, 1954, (1958 ed.).p.7.), was asked:
(Q): I think you are able to read and follow the Bible in Hebrew ....
(A). Yes.
The next day, he was put to the test. Could he really follow the Bible in Hebrew? Franz was asked to translate a simple Bible text at Genesis 2:4:6
(Q): I think we come to the name Jehovah in the forth verse, don't we, of the second chapter of Genesis ... [page 34]
(A). Yes.
(Q): You, yourself, read and speak Hebrew, do you?
(Remember, Franz had admitted to this the previous day)
(A): I do not speak Hebrew.
(The examiner was surprised to hear this)
(Q): You do not!
(A). No.
Q): Can you, yourself, translate that into Hebrew?
(A): Which?
(Q): That fourth verse of the second chapter of Genesis?
(A): You mean here?
(Q). Yes?
(A): No, I won't attempt to do that.
What Franz "wouldn't attempt" to translate into Hebrew is what many have said as a simple exercise an average first or second-year Hebrew student in seminary would be able to do. Franz could neither speak Hebrew nor translate the English to Hebrew. The President of the Watchtower allowed Jehovah's Witnesses to believe he is a Bible scholar having an education in Biblical languages. The facts show otherwise. He is not a scholar. In fact, there is not one Bible scholar among the Watchtower leaders. There couldn’t be one in good conscience because of their theology and what they have done in their translation.
Fred Franz Revealed as Accuracy Checker
In the same trial, Fred Franz, then head of the Watchtower Editorial Board, admitted that he himself was the one who had checked the accuracy of the translation and recommended its publication.
(Q): Insofar as translation of the Bible itself is undertaken, are you responsible for that?
(A): I have been authorized to examine a translation and determine its accuracy and recommend its acceptance in the form in which it is submitted.
Later, Franz was asked about his own involvement in the translating (Douglas Walsh v. The Right Honorable James Latham Clyde, M.P., P.C., etc., Scotland, 1954, (1958 ed.).p.92)
(Q) : Were you yourself responsible for the translation of the Old Testament?
( A ) : Again I cannot answer that question...
Here, under oath, Franz refused to confirm or deny he was the translator of the Hebrew text. Why wouldn't he say that he did not translate the Old Testament? The court also wondered "why" and asked (ibid)
(Q): Why the secrecy?
(A): Because the committee of translation wanted it to remain anonymous and not seek any glory or honour at the making of a translation, and having any names attached thereto.
Why is it the writers of the New Testament books identified their authorship by their names, we know they were not seeking honor.
The facts speak for themselves. The real reason would be that the translators could not be checked since they had no qualifications and anyone investigating this could not find anyone to assume responsibility for the translation. A shrewd plan indeed.
According to Raymond Franz, only Fred Franz had "sufficient knowledge of the Bible languages to attempt translation of this kind. He had studied Greek for two years in the University of Cincinnati but was only self taught In Hebrew." Raymond Franz, Crisis of Conscience (Atlanta: Commentary Press, 1983), 50
Not one of the men had ever studied Greek, and wouldn't know the difference between an alpha or a omega. Only three of the five had even finished high school. Of those three only one went on to College. His name was Fredrick Franz, the same man who became the President of the Jehovah's Witnesses. He did begin at the University of Cincinatti but only completed two years. He then dropped out of College after the first semester in 1913 because he believed what Russell told him, that Christ was returning in 1914. He does not have even the most basic college degree, and certainly does not possess a degree for advanced study of the Bible. In fact, outside of the Watchtower circle Franz is not recognized by anyone as a scholar.
As M. James Penton, a former Jehovah's Witness and historian, has written, "to all intents and purposes the New World Translation is the work of one man-Frederick Franz." M. James Penton, Apocalypse Delayed: The Story of Jehovah's Witnesses (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985), 174.
"
http://pocketanswers.net/JW_Fred_Franz_Trial.htm
Fred Franz Unable to Translate Hebrew
Fred Franz was the leader of the New World Translation (NWT) committee and subsequent president of the Watchtower Society, and the only member of the secret committee to have any training in Hebrew or Greek, limited as it was.
Mr. Franz, under oath in a trial in Scotland in the Scottish Court of Sessions in November, 1954 (Douglas Walsh v. The Right Honorable James Latham Clyde, M.P., P.C., etc., Scotland, 1954, (1958 ed.).p.7.), was asked:
(Q): I think you are able to read and follow the Bible in Hebrew ....
(A). Yes.
The next day, he was put to the test. Could he really follow the Bible in Hebrew? Franz was asked to translate a simple Bible text at Genesis 2:4:6
(Q): I think we come to the name Jehovah in the forth verse, don't we, of the second chapter of Genesis ... [page 34]
(A). Yes.
(Q): You, yourself, read and speak Hebrew, do you?
(Remember, Franz had admitted to this the previous day)
(A): I do not speak Hebrew.
(The examiner was surprised to hear this)
(Q): You do not!
(A). No.
Q): Can you, yourself, translate that into Hebrew?
(A): Which?
(Q): That fourth verse of the second chapter of Genesis?
(A): You mean here?
(Q). Yes?
(A): No, I won't attempt to do that.
What Franz "wouldn't attempt" to translate into Hebrew is what many have said as a simple exercise an average first or second-year Hebrew student in seminary would be able to do. Franz could neither speak Hebrew nor translate the English to Hebrew. The President of the Watchtower allowed Jehovah's Witnesses to believe he is a Bible scholar having an education in Biblical languages. The facts show otherwise. He is not a scholar. In fact, there is not one Bible scholar among the Watchtower leaders. There couldn’t be one in good conscience because of their theology and what they have done in their translation.
Fred Franz Revealed as Accuracy Checker
In the same trial, Fred Franz, then head of the Watchtower Editorial Board, admitted that he himself was the one who had checked the accuracy of the translation and recommended its publication.
(Q): Insofar as translation of the Bible itself is undertaken, are you responsible for that?
(A): I have been authorized to examine a translation and determine its accuracy and recommend its acceptance in the form in which it is submitted.
Later, Franz was asked about his own involvement in the translating (Douglas Walsh v. The Right Honorable James Latham Clyde, M.P., P.C., etc., Scotland, 1954, (1958 ed.).p.92)
(Q) : Were you yourself responsible for the translation of the Old Testament?
( A ) : Again I cannot answer that question...
Here, under oath, Franz refused to confirm or deny he was the translator of the Hebrew text. Why wouldn't he say that he did not translate the Old Testament? The court also wondered "why" and asked (ibid)
(Q): Why the secrecy?
(A): Because the committee of translation wanted it to remain anonymous and not seek any glory or honour at the making of a translation, and having any names attached thereto.
Why is it the writers of the New Testament books identified their authorship by their names, we know they were not seeking honor.
The facts speak for themselves. The real reason would be that the translators could not be checked since they had no qualifications and anyone investigating this could not find anyone to assume responsibility for the translation. A shrewd plan indeed.
According to Raymond Franz, only Fred Franz had "sufficient knowledge of the Bible languages to attempt translation of this kind. He had studied Greek for two years in the University of Cincinnati but was only self taught In Hebrew." Raymond Franz, Crisis of Conscience (Atlanta: Commentary Press, 1983), 50
Not one of the men had ever studied Greek, and wouldn't know the difference between an alpha or a omega. Only three of the five had even finished high school. Of those three only one went on to College. His name was Fredrick Franz, the same man who became the President of the Jehovah's Witnesses. He did begin at the University of Cincinatti but only completed two years. He then dropped out of College after the first semester in 1913 because he believed what Russell told him, that Christ was returning in 1914. He does not have even the most basic college degree, and certainly does not possess a degree for advanced study of the Bible. In fact, outside of the Watchtower circle Franz is not recognized by anyone as a scholar.
As M. James Penton, a former Jehovah's Witness and historian, has written, "to all intents and purposes the New World Translation is the work of one man-Frederick Franz." M. James Penton, Apocalypse Delayed: The Story of Jehovah's Witnesses (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985), 174.
"
http://pocketanswers.net/JW_Fred_Franz_Trial.htm
This demonstrates how the watchtower has been dishonest in claiming that scholars support the nwt
https://digilander.libero.it/domingo7/protestanti.htm
https://digilander.libero.it/domingo7/protestanti.htm
Good points and like I prefaced my post, 'we are getting into waters way over our head'. Only God could give us definitive statements as to what was going on in the Incarnation. He has revealed only so much our finite minds can barely handle and if He revealed more we would be in overload. (1Cor 13:12).
How many wills? One, His Father's.
Jesus as our representative was tempted/tested in all points as we, yet perfectly entrusted Himself to the Father. (Heb 4:15-16) - as we ideally are to do. IMHO
How many wills? One, His Father's.
Jesus as our representative was tempted/tested in all points as we, yet perfectly entrusted Himself to the Father. (Heb 4:15-16) - as we ideally are to do. IMHO
The LDS Mormon Trinity is not the same as the Christian Trinity.
From my reading of LDS literature they teach that the godhead consists of three distinct gods in harmony.
"Latter-day Saints believe in God the Father; his Son, Jesus Christ; and the Holy Ghost (A of F 1). These three Gods form the Godhead, which holds the keys of power over the universe. Each member of the Godhead is an independent personage, separate and distinct from the other two, the three being in perfect unity and harmony with each other (AF, chap. 2).
....
On June 16, 1844, in his last Sunday sermon before his martyrdom, Joseph Smith declared that "in all congregations" he had taught "the plurality of Gods" for fifteen years: "I have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and that the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a Spirit: and these three constitute three distinct personages and three Gods" (TPJS, p. 370).
...
Although the three members of the Godhead are distinct personages, their Godhead is "one" in that all three are united in their thoughts, actions, and purpose, with each having a fulness of knowledge, truth, and power. Each is a God. This does not imply a mystical union of substance or personality. Joseph Smith taught: Many men say there is one God; the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are only one God. I say that is a strange God anyhow-three in one, and one in three! It is a curious organization anyhow.
...
Each member of the Godhead fulfills particular functions in relation to each of the others and to mankind. God the Father presides over the Godhead. He is the Father of all human spirits and of the physical body of Jesus Christ. The human body was formed in his image.
...
The LDS doctrine of the Godhead differs from the various concepts of the Trinity."
https://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Godhead
byu stands for Brigham Young University
Please do not equate the Christian concept of the Trinity with the false LDS Trinity.
From my reading of LDS literature they teach that the godhead consists of three distinct gods in harmony.
"Latter-day Saints believe in God the Father; his Son, Jesus Christ; and the Holy Ghost (A of F 1). These three Gods form the Godhead, which holds the keys of power over the universe. Each member of the Godhead is an independent personage, separate and distinct from the other two, the three being in perfect unity and harmony with each other (AF, chap. 2).
....
On June 16, 1844, in his last Sunday sermon before his martyrdom, Joseph Smith declared that "in all congregations" he had taught "the plurality of Gods" for fifteen years: "I have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and that the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a Spirit: and these three constitute three distinct personages and three Gods" (TPJS, p. 370).
...
Although the three members of the Godhead are distinct personages, their Godhead is "one" in that all three are united in their thoughts, actions, and purpose, with each having a fulness of knowledge, truth, and power. Each is a God. This does not imply a mystical union of substance or personality. Joseph Smith taught: Many men say there is one God; the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are only one God. I say that is a strange God anyhow-three in one, and one in three! It is a curious organization anyhow.
...
Each member of the Godhead fulfills particular functions in relation to each of the others and to mankind. God the Father presides over the Godhead. He is the Father of all human spirits and of the physical body of Jesus Christ. The human body was formed in his image.
...
The LDS doctrine of the Godhead differs from the various concepts of the Trinity."
https://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Godhead
byu stands for Brigham Young University
Please do not equate the Christian concept of the Trinity with the false LDS Trinity.
-
1
- Show all