[soc.religion.christian] Mormon

dicarlo@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (09/02/90)

In article <Aug.30.00.32.51.1990.22753@athos.rutgers.edu> fuzzy@portia.stanford.edu 
           (Daniel Zappala) writes:

>                < first portion deleted >
>                             .
>                             .
>                             .
>I think that many people who believe in the trinity are too focused
>on the "oneness" of God, and forget that the trinity also means there
>are three separate persons involved, with three separate "functions."
>So if you want to argue that God doesn't need a group of "advisors",
>you are in effect arguing against a trinity also...God could surely
>have conceived a plan of salvation for humanity as a single person
>too.
>
>Daniel Zappala

I have been following this news group for a little over a month now
and have found it very enlightening.  This is the first posting which 
has moved me to speakup.  Actually, the paragraph included above is 
what has moved me to join this discussion.

The concept of the Trinity does not necessarily mean that it is made 
up of three entities.  Another word that I prefer to use is 'mediums'.
I use the definition 'method through which something is transmitted'.
God is the Creator.  The Intelligence behind all creation.  The Holy 
Spirit is the medium through which God communicates to us 'or to our 
souls'.  This is the spiritual portion of God.  Jesus 'or His Son or 
Christ etc.' is the material or flesh portion of God.  Jesus was the 
medium through which we are forgiven of our sins, taught the true 
meaning of God's laws, and given eternal life.

Therefore, I am saying that the Trinity is made up of one entity and 
two mediums through which the entity communicates.

I do not know if this has been considered by anyone else.  This also 
means that I do not know if the United Methodist church, of which I 
am a member, would even consider this a possible analogy.  This is 
what I feel to be a valid view.

The Bible was written to allow any person from any backround the 
ability to gleam the truth with a little help from or through the Holy 
Spirit.  It was not meant to be a doctoral thesis on the make up of 
God.  It was meant to teach us how to live with one another and for 
the glory of God.  So, why can't we live and let live or as the 
Methodist's put it "Think and let think".  In the end, each and every 
one of us will find out the truth.  We should all follow the two basic
teachings of Jesus:

1) Love your neighbor as your self.

2) Love God with all your heart and soul and mind.

David DiCarlo

==========================================================================
David DiCarlo                    =
Allen-Bradley                    =  These are my views and NOT those of 
ICCG                             =  my employer.
747 Alpha Drive                  =
Highland Heights, OH  44143      =  Some times I wonder if they even 
                                 =  listen to my views.  Oh well, I do 
Ext. 3407                        =  get a paycheck...........
==========================================================================

[Your presentation seems to be similar to what is typically called
"modalism".  It asserts that the three persons correspond, not to
actual distinctions in the being of God, but to different ways that he
reveals himself to us.  Modalism is regarded as a heresy.  Of course
many modern theologians don't worry about whether their ideas are
orthodox, and you may not choose to either.  Certain I don't propose
to burn you at the stake.  But most heresies do end up with problems
in dealing with some aspect of Christ's person or work.  There are
certainly different approaches to the Trinity, even if you intend to
be orthodox.  Some people tend to start with God's unity and others
with the separate identity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
However whichever side you start from, if you intend to be orthodox,
you must end up doing justice to both the unity of God and the
distinction between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.  --clh]