Trinitarianism is a pretty specific formulation that does't even translate well into english (the creed is in latin/greek). No scripture is trinitarian, the trinity is the type of thing only a committtee of debating theologians could come up with..
@@GospelTangents I'd argue that nothing can be "trinitarian" without some reference to Homoousion/the same substance. No scripture genuinely captures that. Like Dr Spencer mentions in the video, Abinadi only really captures the issue of Christ's divine and human nature, which is a united monophysite nature, the same as mainstream Christians. Its not answering the council of Nicea, its answering the Council of Chalcedon, in terms of topic.
In the very first chapter Lehi in his vision sees the Father sees the Father sitting on a throne. This means he is not invisible or un-see-able. It also means God is man for he sits on a throne. Then he sees Jesus descending to the earth. So two individuals not one. In verse 7 of Mosiah 15 he says there are two wills, the Son's will being swollowed up in the will of the Father's. So again two different beings.
It's easy to pull out one thing as a counter example, but it's hard to reconcile with Abinadi's more trinitarian writings. How do you reconcile Abinadi with those verses?
Not so much. Saints see the theology of bom passages like Mosiah 15 as more Trinitarian, but Evangelicals tend to say that they're contratrinitarian and more modalistic.
I feel like one could argue that JS meets that requirement, he was steeped in trinitarian doctrine. And the 1830 edition of the BoM seems to illustrate that.
There is a possibility that Joseph moved toward three distinct beings after he began his path towards polygamy. Pre 1836 church of Christ and pre 1837 BOM was less specific on Godhead and more tolerant of God being ONE.
It's interesting to see how everyone has different perspectives. People like Chris Thomas (pentecostal) and Kyle Beshears (baptist) don't see the trinity in the Book of Mormon, while Don Bradley and Dave Butler (both LDS) see lots of parallels with LDS Temple theology.
Is the Bible Trinitarian,? If it is, I don't see it. Jesus tells His disciples to be one, like the Father and I are one. This pretty much clears up the rest of the verses which say the "Father and I are one." I see no basis in the Bible for Trinity.
Yes but you're coming at it from your LDS context (I'm assuming you're LDS) where it has been beaten into you the specific LDS nature of the godhead. Grow up in an protestant context, I guarantee you, you'd only see trinitarian or modalistic things in the Bible and be unable to see the LDS perspective.
@@ChrisRobison You're probably right and I thank God for it. Although I was raised "LDS" I have not always been active and have been quick to find fault. I actually consider myself to be an adult convert, having rejected most everything my parents tried to force-feed me. Despite all that, finding Trinitariianism in the Bible is a stretch, since Jesus is proclaimed to be the Son of God so many times. The fact that He also happens to be the God of the Old Testament and the Word who was with God from the beginning (and was God) does not, in my opinion, constitute Trinitariianism. Certainly nobody in either the Old or New testaments, believed that Jesus was anything other than the Devine Son of God. Consider Psalms 110:1 (an Old Testament verse and a Hebrew hymn of David.) " The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." I don't see how this could be referring to anybody other than the Eternal Father and the Son.
Abinadi in Mosiah 14:6 quotes Isaiah 53:6: “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on ***him*** the iniquity of us all.” We know that the ***him*** in this verse is Jesus. But who is the LORD in this verse? Is it the Father of YHWH (Jehovah) named Elohim that the Jews basically never mentioned or prayed to? In the original Hebrew this verse does not use a word that means “LORD”. It uses the divine name: YHWH, or Jehovah in our current English. So this verse verifies that Jesus is NOT the Old Testament Jehovah. And this is true in ALL the Messianic prophecies. Jesus is the Messiah that Jehovah sends. The resurrected Jesus speaks as the Heir and Jehovah for this earth. But by overwhelming evidence Jesus in scripture is not the creation and Old Testaments Jehovah. Mosiah 15:8 distinguishes between God and the Son. So in Mosiah 15:1-5 Abinadi must not be saying they are the same Being.
Thanks for sharing this interview.
Dr Spencer's teased Mosiah theory is tantalizing - I hope to read his book when it comes out
I hope to have him on again!
@@GospelTangents that would be great!
Exciting!
Great Topic.
Trinitarianism is a pretty specific formulation that does't even translate well into english (the creed is in latin/greek). No scripture is trinitarian, the trinity is the type of thing only a committtee of debating theologians could come up with..
It's pretty easy to argue that the Book of Mormon is more trinitarian than the Bible.
@@GospelTangents I'd argue that nothing can be "trinitarian" without some reference to Homoousion/the same substance. No scripture genuinely captures that. Like Dr Spencer mentions in the video, Abinadi only really captures the issue of Christ's divine and human nature, which is a united monophysite nature, the same as mainstream Christians. Its not answering the council of Nicea, its answering the Council of Chalcedon, in terms of topic.
In the very first chapter Lehi in his vision sees the Father sees the Father sitting on a throne.
This means he is not invisible or un-see-able. It also means God is man for he sits on a throne.
Then he sees Jesus descending to the earth. So two individuals not one.
In verse 7 of Mosiah 15 he says there are two wills, the Son's will being swollowed up in the will of the Father's. So again two different beings.
It's easy to pull out one thing as a counter example, but it's hard to reconcile with Abinadi's more trinitarian writings. How do you reconcile Abinadi with those verses?
@@GospelTangents How long can a posting on RUclips be? 😵💫
@@NancyBrown-xw8hg I don't know but long comments usually don't get read.
The B of M is trinitarian in the minds of those steeped in trinitarian doctrine.
Or don't really understand the Trinity.
But was Joseph steeped in trinitarian doctrine, and that's how it got there?
Not so much. Saints see the theology of bom passages like Mosiah 15 as more Trinitarian, but Evangelicals tend to say that they're contratrinitarian and more modalistic.
I feel like one could argue that JS meets that requirement, he was steeped in trinitarian doctrine. And the 1830 edition of the BoM seems to illustrate that.
@@sirria100 Chris Thomas thinks it is very trinitarian as I recall.
There is a possibility that Joseph moved toward three distinct beings after he began his path towards polygamy. Pre 1836 church of Christ and pre 1837 BOM was less specific on Godhead and more tolerant of God being ONE.
It's interesting to see how everyone has different perspectives. People like Chris Thomas (pentecostal) and Kyle Beshears (baptist) don't see the trinity in the Book of Mormon, while Don Bradley and Dave Butler (both LDS) see lots of parallels with LDS Temple theology.
Is the Bible Trinitarian,? If it is, I don't see it. Jesus tells His disciples to be one, like the Father and I are one. This pretty much clears up the rest of the verses which say the "Father and I are one." I see no basis in the Bible for Trinity.
Yes but you're coming at it from your LDS context (I'm assuming you're LDS) where it has been beaten into you the specific LDS nature of the godhead. Grow up in an protestant context, I guarantee you, you'd only see trinitarian or modalistic things in the Bible and be unable to see the LDS perspective.
@@ChrisRobison You're probably right and I thank God for it. Although I was raised "LDS" I have not always been active and have been quick to find fault. I actually consider myself to be an adult convert, having rejected most everything my parents tried to force-feed me.
Despite all that, finding Trinitariianism in the Bible is a stretch, since Jesus is proclaimed to be the Son of God so many times. The fact that He also happens to be the God of the Old Testament and the Word who was with God from the beginning (and was God) does not, in my opinion, constitute Trinitariianism.
Certainly nobody in either the Old or New testaments, believed that Jesus was anything other than the Devine Son of God.
Consider Psalms 110:1 (an Old Testament verse and a Hebrew hymn of David.)
" The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool."
I don't see how this could be referring to anybody other than the Eternal Father and the Son.
How many times does he have to say he’s not ready to defend his position 😂…got awkward
Abinadi in Mosiah 14:6 quotes Isaiah 53:6: “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on ***him*** the iniquity of us all.” We know that the ***him*** in this verse is Jesus. But who is the LORD in this verse? Is it the Father of YHWH (Jehovah) named Elohim that the Jews basically never mentioned or prayed to? In the original Hebrew this verse does not use a word that means “LORD”. It uses the divine name: YHWH, or Jehovah in our current English. So this verse verifies that Jesus is NOT the Old Testament Jehovah. And this is true in ALL the Messianic prophecies. Jesus is the Messiah that Jehovah sends. The resurrected Jesus speaks as the Heir and Jehovah for this earth. But by overwhelming evidence Jesus in scripture is not the creation and Old Testaments Jehovah. Mosiah 15:8 distinguishes between God and the Son. So in Mosiah 15:1-5 Abinadi must not be saying they are the same Being.