# In Christian belief can other parts of the Trinity become incarnate **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 22, 2006, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-christian-belief-can-other-parts-of-the-trinity-become-incarnate/357826 "2006-05-22T21:45:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2006, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-christian-belief-can-other-parts-of-the-trinity-become-incarnate/357826/21 "2006-05-24T23:39:13Z")
yelimS: Wait until you get to the New Testament and see the “progression” of the theology even just in that part! ---
**Author:** ![Jebus\_H.Christ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Jebus\_H.Christ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jebus_H.Christ)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2006, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-christian-belief-can-other-parts-of-the-trinity-become-incarnate/357826/22 "2006-05-24T23:47:21Z")
[QUOTE=Monty] We are taught that the members of the Godhead are one in purpose. [/QUOTE] How would members of the Godhead being of one purpose relate to: Matthew 24:36 > [@](#): > > No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. If the Father has the purpose of ending the world at a specific day and hour, how can the Son be of the same purpose if he doesn’t know the day and hour? I am not even sure of what the LDS’s position is on the Gospels. Are they accepted in a similiar way as in orthodox Christianity? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2006, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-christian-belief-can-other-parts-of-the-trinity-become-incarnate/357826/23 "2006-05-25T00:05:57Z")
[QUOTE=Jebus H. Christ] How would members of the Godhead being of one purpose relate to: Matthew 24:36 If the Father has the purpose of ending the world at a specific day and hour, how can the Son be of the same purpose if he doesn’t know the day and hour? [/quote] My guess is that the Son is ready to go into action for His assigned duties on that day. Kind of like the Mod Squad, but less people. > [@](#): > > I am not even sure of what the LDS’s position is on the Gospels. Are they accepted in a similiar way as in orthodox Christianity? The LDS position on the Bible is that it’s believed “so far as it is translated correctly.” ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2006, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-christian-belief-can-other-parts-of-the-trinity-become-incarnate/357826/24 "2006-05-25T00:48:59Z")
[QUOTE=Jebus H. Christ] Is there anything in Christian Theology about the possibility of the Father’s or Holy Spirit’s ability to become incarnate in the same say the Word became incarnate? [/QUOTE] Well, if you consider the bible as the basis of Christian Theology, there is a reference in the Old Testament to an incarnation of God. From the Bible Gateway > [@](#): > > Jacob Wrestles With God > 22 That night Jacob got up and took his two wives, his two maidservants and his eleven sons and crossed the ford of the Jabbok. 23 After he had sent them across the stream, he sent over all his possessions. 24 So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. 25 When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob’s hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. 26 Then the man said, “Let me go, for it is daybreak.” > But Jacob replied, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.” > 27 The man asked him, “What is your name?” > “Jacob,” he answered. > > 28 Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, [e] because you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome.” > > 29 Jacob said, “Please tell me your name.” > But he replied, “Why do you ask my name?” Then he blessed him there. > > 30 So Jacob called the place Peniel, [f] saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.” ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2006, 7:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-christian-belief-can-other-parts-of-the-trinity-become-incarnate/357826/25 "2006-05-26T07:49:54Z")
[QUOTE=Monty] The only relevant comment in there is your admission that you’re doing this “to piss off people.” [/QUOTE] Whoosh I find it fascinating that the Mormon Church, a religion with clear-cut dogma, both explicit and concrete, has made this degree of change. If the beliefs weren’t presented as the claims of the literal truth; if, instead, they were presented as stories or symbolisms, then it would not matter what evolution in the doctrine occurred, or when and why this occurred. However, because Mormonism claims the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, then there is a certain fascination in poking around and finding discrepancies. If the truth is the truth, and always has been the truth, then for what reason does it change? One can argue that God has a mysterious plan, but an agnostic / atheist, such as myself, is more likely to look for more Earthly reasons. With that background, we look at the Mormon version of the Godhood, and examine the evolution of Joseph Smith’s thoughts of God. Just as one turns to fossils for evidence of evolution of live, there are traces found of the doctrinal changes in the scriptures produced by and teachings of these prophets. There is the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, Peal of Great Price, the First Vision story, and the Journal of Discourses, among others. As I posted earlier, it appears that Joseph Smith’s thoughts on the deity undertook several major, radical steps, comparable to anything which occurred in natural evolution. His first teachings showed Smith’s belief in monotheism, the belief in one god. Evidence for this comes from the 1830 Book of Mormon, Smith’s corrections to the Bible and the Book of Moses. Smith’s view of monotheism differs radically, with a belief that Christ and the Father were the same people. From the Book of Mormon > [@](#): > > “Teach them that redemption cometh through Christ the Lord, who is the very Eternal Father.” This also ties into the OP, since if there is only one god, who is both the Father and the Son, then this god has chosen the form of the Son to come to this Earth. With Smith’s fourth phase, came the concept of multiple gods, the teaching which I learned growing up of pioneer stock in the 60s and 70s in Salt Lake City. "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.‘’ is the famous teaching coined by one of the prophets to explain the still – for now – official Mormon concept of divinity. I’ll address the potential for change later. This is the long answer to the OP, Is there anything in Christian Theology about the possibility of the Father’s or Holy Spirit’s ability to become incarnate in the same say the Word became incarnate? The Father went down as a human in a previous world. Christ, as our spiritual older brother, came down as a human in this world, as we do. IIRC, the Holy Ghost has a job without a body for now, but will get his own, in time. As I pointed out in a recent thread about the LDS view of eternal marriage, the view of marriage in the afterlife is tied to polygamy. This in turn is tied to the concept of eternal progression and the idea that ordinary mortals have the opportunity to become gods in the next lifetime. As species evolve to fit their surroundings, the Mormon concept of God seems to have evolved to fit Smith’s at first secret delving into polygamy. The justification for polygamy was that we are to be gods and goddesses in the next world, and polygamy was a prerequisite for exaltation. What evidence can be seen for this? In addition to the references about, these evolution is clearly seen in changing versions of the First Vision. As a Mormon missionary in the early 80s in Kyushu, I memorized the Japanese translation of this beautifully elegant but simple story of Smith’s initial encounter with the Godhood. Of course, as with all Mormons, I was familiar with this story from a young age. In one setting, the young Smith is visited by the Devil, the Holy Ghost, and then the physical personages of God the Father and Jesus, side by side. Mormons regularly share their testimonies that they have received verification from God about the truth of this story. However, this version dates from 1835, some 19 years after it was supposed to have occurred. Not surprisingly, there are several conflicting versions of the occasion, all of which predate the orthodox version. The earliest known First Vision dates from 1831, just after the Book of Mormon was first published. Smith says that Christ visited him as a single divine personage. This is consistent with Smith’s original view of the Godhood. The subsequent changes certainly reflect the changes in Smith’s view of God. So where does that leave the Mormon Church’s stance on Godhood now? From what I can gather, the Mormon Church wants to appear more mainstream now. There are official references to “God the Father,” “God the Son” and “God the Holy Ghost,” although this doesn’t seem to be the predominant manner of address. In an incident which received wide-spread coverage, As posted earlier President Hinckley told Larry King and a national audience that we don’t know a lot about that (the concept of people becoming gods), although this was followed by the claim that he was referring to the process of becoming gods and not the concept of it. Since this is one of the points which separates Mormonism from mainstream Christianity, it may be possible for future evolution to occur. As an earlier poster said, the Mormon Church suffers from the unfortunate lot of having been created in recent history. As such, the conflicts and changes are within historians and distracters’ reach. This is a very long answer to the OP, but the short answer doesn’t tell the rest of the story. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2006, 8:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-christian-belief-can-other-parts-of-the-trinity-become-incarnate/357826/26 "2006-05-26T08:02:05Z")
And yet again you post a long-winded diatribe that really doesn’t address the current issue. Really, TokyoPlayer, I’m starting to think that you’re losing touch. It’s kind of sad. ---
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2006, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-christian-belief-can-other-parts-of-the-trinity-become-incarnate/357826/27 "2006-05-26T14:22:16Z")
[QUOTE=yelimS] I think this fits in here somewhere: who are these: Genesis 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And, I haven’t gotten thus far in the bible yet, but I hear that somewhere in there God has a meeting with the other Gods and banishes them. What? [/QUOTE] I think you’re referring to Psalm 82. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2006, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-christian-belief-can-other-parts-of-the-trinity-become-incarnate/357826/28 "2006-05-26T15:44:39Z")
[QUOTE=Monty] And yet again you post a long-winded diatribe that really doesn’t address the current issue. Really, TokyoPlayer, I’m starting to think that you’re losing touch. It’s kind of sad. [/QUOTE] You are so cute when you get huffy, Brother Monty. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2006, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-christian-belief-can-other-parts-of-the-trinity-become-incarnate/357826/29 "2006-05-26T18:10:17Z")
[QUOTE=TokyoPlayer] You are so cute when you get huffy, Brother Monty. [/QUOTE] On the other hand, you are not at all cute when you post multiple hijacks of threads on different topics simply to launch one more attack on the CoJCoLDS. While I have no problem with any discussion of (or challenge to) any group’s theology, you have persistently interrupted threads to attack the _history_ of one group as in [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=7257224#post7257224), [this post, in which you move from a legitimate discussion of the theological points to an attack on the nature of the LDS](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=7306262#post7306262), and [this deliberate hijack](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=7422064#post7422064). Please confine your attacks on the LDS history to threads that are directly addressing the history of that church. However they arrived at their _current_ theology is irrelevant to the doctrines they _currently_ preach when _current_ belief is the topic under discussion. Posting an insulting response to another poster who has challenged your hijack is also no way to conduct yourself in this Forum. (OTOH, Monty, given the lack of interest displayed by other posters, you might consider that you are giving his views wider play by responding to each one instead of letting them roll off the page.) [/Moderating] [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-christian-belief-can-other-parts-of-the-trinity-become-incarnate/357826.md?page=1)