The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) proclaims that they are a church that embraces ongoing or continual revelation. This primarily means that they view the canon of Scripture as not being closed. Christianity affirms that the canon of Scripture is closed in that God has given His Word that encompasses all that is needed to be known for the salvation of humankind and reconciliation with a holy, triune God. God being triune/tri-unity is God’s highest revelation of Himself to fallen humanity. Mormonism rejects this highest revelation of God. God revealed in Scripture as triune/tri-unity is known in Christianity as the Trinity. How’s the Trinity defined?

Within the one Being that is God,
there are three distinct Persons who are
coequal, coeternal, coexistent, and co-substance:
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

What are the particular highlights and considerations of this doctrine?

• There is only one God.
• God is three Persons.
• Each Person is fully God in substance/nature/essence.
• All the Persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) are equal in all of their attributes. However, there are distinctions and differences in roles that are particular to each Person. A difference in role does not mean inferiority in nature or essence. The Father decrees all that will take place; the Son brings to pass all that the Father decrees; the Spirit brings all into conformity or compliance.
• The Trinity must be divinely revealed and not humanely constructed.

Who is this doctrine for and why is it important? I concur with Dr. James White’s points that were made in his book The Forgotten Trinity:

• This doctrine is one of the main pillars of Christianity
• The Trinity is for Bible-believing people. The eternality of God and His triune nature are doctrines for Christians.
• The miracle of salvation must take place for the Christian to love and accept the doctrine.
• Christians are compelled to accept this doctrine for the same reasons the early church fathers did: the Scriptures compel us and leave us no choice!
• After looking at the Trinitarians language of the New Testament, it’s easy to see why the early church formulated the doctrine. This truth couldn’t be denied.
•  Mature Christians desire to know, understand, and love the Trinity.
• One must understand and accept the Trinity to know Christ.
• We have to worship God as He exists and not merely as we wish Him to be.

Is this doctrine understandable? Here are some thoughts on this matter:

• One would be in error to state that the Trinity is understandable and without mystery. However, mankind can understand the doctrine of the Trinity as to what the Bible teaches about the nature of God and three Persons that reveal the one Being/God.
• It is correct and wise in saying that to fully comprehend the Being of God is beyond comprehension. There are some things about God that He has reserved only to be known within His own counsel. These are the secret things; other things He has chosen to reveal to humankind (Deut 29:29).
• Christians affirm this doctrine because God has revealed that this is what He is like. Our finite minds cannot grasp the infinite. The fullness of the Trinity is incomprehensible. This is what makes God who is He is: infinite; this makes human beings who they are: finite.

Mormonism joins the ranks with many non-Christian sects in its denial of the Trinity:

While respecting the divergent views of other people of faith, Church leaders want to be clear about the beliefs that help define Latter-day Saints…Among the most important differences with other Christian churches are those concerning the nature of God and Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. (Mormon Newsroom, Core Beliefs)

The Trinity of traditional Christianity is referred to as the Godhead by members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. While the same terms are used by Latter-day Saints and other Christians for the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (or Holy Ghost), the Latter-day Saints understanding of the three members of the Godhead is significantly different from that of traditional Christianity. (Mormon Newsroom, The Godhead)

It’s admirable that the LDS Church made that clarification, because this is what separates Mormonism from Christianity. Mormons are constantly stating to the Christian community, “We are Christians just like you.” Why and how so? They have excluded themselves by their own admission in their rejection of the Trinity doctrine. Mormons blur the horizon by applying to themselves the “Christian” label. However, this doesn’t nullify the fact that Mormonism has diverted sharply and greatly from “…the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints” (Jude 3). What are the talking points and statements by the LDS Church regarding the Trinity that are put forth by LDS General Authorities and repeated verbatim by LDS Church members?

1. The word Trinity isn’t in the Bible along with the doctrine.
2. The Trinity doctrine came out of the Council of Nicea.
3.  The Trinity doctrine is the product of the councils of men and was not believed by the early Christians including the apostles, church fathers, and those that followed them prior to the Council of Nicea.

First, the Council of Nicea didn’t formulate the doctrine known today as the Trinity. The Council of Nicea was called to affirm the deity of Jesus Christ – not to affirm or formulate the Trinity doctrine – in light of the Arian heresy instigated by Arius, a church presbyter, who was quickly condemned as a heretic.

Second, it’s true that the word Trinity isn’t in the Bible. Nevertheless, the word Trinity (tri-unity) was coined because it accurately describes and names what is revealed in Scripture when the doctrine is defined. There are numerous words and doctrines that are exclusive to Mormonism that cannot be found in the Bible. These would include words such as quorum, endowment, Kolob, and many others. Doctrinal terms would be celestial marriage, exaltation, eternal progression, the preexistence of human spirits and their passing through the veil of forgetfulness, etc. The difference between these LDS words and doctrines and the Christian word Trinity and the doctrine as it is defined, is that the Christian doctrine of the Trinity can be found in the Bible while the LDS words and doctrines (as Mormons define them) cannot. Of course, our Mormon friends will point to further or ongoing revelation outside of the Bible in defense. However, if these LDS doctrines were true, then God would have revealed them to His people in the Bible. God did not withhold from His people issues regarding their salvation until 1830 when the Mormon Church came into existence.

Third, the LDS Church looks unfavorably at the ecumenical councils of the Christian church that took place so long ago as merely “the councils of men.” I have always found this puzzling. What do they call General Conference held twice a year in which they gather to get counsel and direction from their General Authorities? I see these as the councils of men especially when their prophet never puts forth any new revelation coming from the god Mormons pray to who resides near Kolob.

In conclusion, there is a sharp distinction between Christianity and Mormonism just on the doctrine of the Trinity alone not to mention many others. It is for this reason and others that Mormonism will continue to remain outside the Christian community of faith. The next installment in this series will examine the origins of the word Trinity and the teachings that were passed down to Christians, coming from the apostles to the early church fathers.

§

In Part 1 of this series we briefly examined what the doctrine of the Trinity is by definition and specific distinctions, which also included Mormonism’s rejection of the doctrine. The primary reasons why the Mormons reject this Christian teaching was also briefly discussed. The LDS Church claims the early church had no Trinitarian theology prior to the Councils of Nicea in A.D. 325 and Constantinople in A.D. 381, which also included the word Trinity itself coming out of these councils. Because of these historical inaccuracies by the LDS Church, we will explore what was taking place in the primitive church prior to these councils as it relates to Trinitarian theology.

How early in the Christian church was the word Trinity first used as a common term among the fathers prior to the Councils of Nicea and Constantinople? The first mention of Trinitas (Trinity) was by Theophilus who became the bishop of Antioch in A.D. 168. Regarding the creation of the world he stated:

CHAP. XV. – OF THE FOURTH DAY…In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity, of God, and His Word, and His wisdom. And the fourth is the type of man, who needs light, that so there may be God, the Word, wisdom, man. (Theophilus to Autolycus, Book II, chapter XV)

The translator for this work had this footnote at the bottom of the page:

[The earliest use of this word “Trinity.”] It seems to have been used by this writer in his lost works, also; and, as a learned friend suggests, the use he makes of it is familiar. He does not lug it in as something novel: “types of Trinity,” he says, illustrating an accepted word, not introducing a new one. It is certain that, according to the notions of Theophilus, God, His Word, and His wisdom constitute a Trinity; and it should seem a Trinity of persons.” He notes that the title σοφια is here assigned to the Holy Spirit.

Early church father Irenaeus commented on God creating ex nihilo:

For God did not stand in need of these [beings], in order to the accomplishment of what He had Himself determined with Himself beforehand should be done, as if He did not possess His own hands. For with Him were always present the Word and Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, He made all things, to whom also He speaks, saying, “Let us make man after Our image and likeness” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4.20.1)

These two hands, according to Irenaeus, are the Son and the Spirit in which the Father accomplishes creation. What do some of the other early church fathers who predate the Council of Nicea by 100 years have to say regarding the Trinity? Here is small sampler:

I understand nothing else than the Trinity to be meant for the third person is the Holy Spirit, and the Son is the second, by whom all things were made according to the will of the Father. (Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata, Book 5, Chapter 14)

All are One, by unity (that is) of substance; while the mystery of the dispensation is still guarded, which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three Persons – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, inasmuch as He is one God. (Tertullian, Against Praxeus, Chapter 2)

‘Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’ And by this He showed, that whosoever omitted any one of these, failed in glorifying God perfectly. For it is through this Trinity that the Father is glorified. (Hippolytus, Against the Heresy of One Noetus, Section 14)

…the divine benefits [are] bestowed upon us by the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, which Trinity is the fountain of all holiness. (Origen, De Principiis 1:4:2)

For it is one and the same thing to share in the Holy Spirit, which is (the Spirit) of the Father and the Son, since the nature of the Trinity is one and incorporeal. (Origen, De Principiis 4:35)

For as we acknowledge a God, and a Son, his Logos, and a Holy Spirit, united in essence, – the Father, the Son, the Spirit, because the Son is the Intelligence, Reason, Wisdom of the Father, and the Spirit an effluence, as light from fire. (Athenagoras, A Plea for the Christians, Chapter 24)

The Bible is very clear that there is only one God (Deut 6:4; Mark 12:29) meaning singular in name, yet in three Persons as stated in the Great Commission by the Lord Himself in Matthew 28:18-20. The early church understood this and rightfully required this in the baptism of converts as was stated in the early church manual entitled The Didache in Chapter VII:

And concerning baptism, thus baptize ye: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water…pour out water thrice upon the head into the name of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit.

The formal theological formations and wording would come later in time when the church was no longer being persecuted and could reflect on theological matters. It’s puzzling to Christians why this is difficult for non-Christian sects to understand. Critics oppose the doctrine of the Trinity on the charge that the doctrine was formalized at the church councils, yet Christianity was outlawed until the Edict of Milan in A.D. 313. Just a little over ten years later the first Council was held in A.D. 325 (Nicea) to deal with the first major heresy (Arianism) coming from within the Church. . Before that time, Christians were running for their very lives, some being thrown as food for wild beasts to devour or were placed in the roasting seat to be cooked to death. It was not a time when Christians could formally gather to carefully reflect on and define theological matters.

The early church always believed in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as one God; they never believed in three gods; they also believed that Jesus Christ was fully God. An untold number of these Christian martyrs eagerly went to their deaths proclaiming their faith and belief in only one God, and Jesus Christ being fully God. It is for these very reasons that professing Christians today will not compromise on the doctrine of the Trinity and the deity of Jesus Christ. As was stated in the conclusion of Part 1, this fundamental point marks a clear and sharp distinction between Christians and Mormons, thus eliminating any glimmer of fanciful hope held by the LDS Church that it would ever be accepted into the Christian community of faith.

§

In Part 3 of this series we want to continue the examination of the early church teaching in what later became known as the Trinity. It is paramount that Christians trace their theology and doctrine coming from the Bible as was written by the apostles and prophets. Our foundation is built upon them (Eph 2:20); Christians stand on very large, strong shoulders when we look at historical theology.

Mormonism claims that Christianity went into apostasy after the death of the apostles, thus the church ceased to exist. This is an absurd charge that is hard to take seriously in light of the historical lineage of Christianity following the death of John the Apostle. Due to the conspiracy theory put forth by Mormons we need to examine the legacy of John the Apostle in the lives of several men, and the teachings that were passed down to them. Surprisingly, the LDS Church makes this declaration pertaining to this discussion:

…While we do not believe the Bible to be inerrant, complete or the final word of God, we accept the essential details of the Gospels and more particularly the divine witness of those men who walked and talked with Him or were mentored by His chosen apostles. (Emphasis mine. Mormon Newsroom, What Mormons Believe About Jesus Christ)

Does the LDS Church really accept the witness of those that “were mentored by His [Jesus] chosen apostles”? Their rejection of the triune God says otherwise. Let’s look at John the Apostle as our starting point. John lived to be a very old man and died in the city of Ephesus (A.D. 100-101). John was very active in proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ along with teaching doctrine to several men – men who would end up becoming bishops of churches mainly because of their credentials of having been taught by John or one of John’s disciples. These men along with several others became the earliest of the Christian church fathers.

Ignatius (death: A.D. 98-117?) was the bishop of Antioch and a disciple of John. Did John teach Ignatius that Jesus Christ was fully God in deity/essence? And was there mention of Persons in a triadic pattern? Let’s find out:

There is the one God and Father, and not two or three; One who is; and there is no other besides Him, the only true [God]…There are not then either three Fathers, or three Sons, or three Paracletes, but one Father, and one Son, and one Paraclete. Wherefore also the Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to “baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” not unto one [person] having three names, nor into three [persons] who became incarnate, but into three possessed of equal honor. (Epistle to the Philippians, Chapter 2)

What did Ignatius do with the instruction he received from John? Eusebius tells us:

He [Ignatius] exhorted them [different churches] to adhere firmly to the tradition of the apostles, which, for the sake of greater security, he deemed it necessary to attest by committing it to writing. (Ecclesiastical History; Book 3, Chapter 36)

The most well-known of John’s disciples was Polycarp (A.D 69/70-155) who was the bishop of Smyrna. His link to John is clear according to Eusebius:

Polycarp flourished in Asia, an intimate disciple of the apostles who received the episcopate of the church at Smyrna, at the hands of the eyewitnesses and servants of the Lord. (Ecclesiastical History, Book 3, Chapter 36).

Notice Polycarp’s prayer that is very triune:

O Lord God almighty…I bless you and glorify you through the eternal and heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, through whom be glory to you, with Him and the Holy Spirit, both now and forever (n. 14, ed. Funk; PG 5.1040).

Let’s now get acquainted with Polycarp’s disciple, Irenaeus (A.D. 130-202), who was the bishop of Lyons. Eusebius introduces us to Irenaeus:

Let us proceed to the order of history. Pothinus, having died with the other martyrs of Gaul [France] in the ninetieth year of his age, was succeeded by Irenaeus in the episcopate of the church at Lyons. We have understood that he was a hearer of Polycarp in his youth. (Ecclesiastical History, Book 5, Chapter 5)

Eusebius quotes Irenaeus’ words to Florinus regarding the instruction he received from Polycarp:

For I saw thee when I was yet a boy in the lower Asia with Polycarp…I remember the events of those times much better than those of more recent occurrence. As the studies of our youth growing with our minds, unite with it so firmly that I can tell also the very place where the blessed Polycarp was accustomed to sit and discourse; and also his entrances, his walks, the complexion of his life and the form of his body, and his conversations with the people, and his familiar intercourse with John, as he was accustomed to tell, as also his familiarity with those that had seen the Lord. How also he used to relate their discourses, and what things he had heard from them concerning the Lord. Also concerning his miracles, his doctrine, all these were told by Polycarp, in consistency with the Holy Scriptures, as he had received them from the eyewitnesses of the doctrine of salvation. These things, by the mercy of God, and the opportunity then afforded me, I attentively heard, noting them down, not on paper, but in my heart; and these same facts I am always in the habit, by the grace of God, to recall faithfully to mind. (Ecclesiastical History, Book 5, Chapter 20)

Irenaeus speaks more of Polycarp and the link to the apostles:

But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true. To these things all the Asiatic Churches testify, as do also these men who have succeeded Polycarp down to the present time…He it was who, coming to Rome in the time of Anicetus caused many to turn away from the aforesaid heretics to the Church of God, proclaiming that he had received this one and sole truth from the apostles, – that, namely, which is handed down by the Church (Against Heresies 3:3:4).

What was Irenaeus taught by Polycarp about Jesus Christ?

…the Word of God…that He is all in all…the Man among men; Son in the Father; God in God; King to all eternity…and the bridegroom of the Church; the Chief also of the cherubim, the Prince of the angelic powers; God of God; Son of the Father; Jesus Christ; King forever and ever. Amen (Fragment 53).

Therefore, the Father is Lord and the Son is Lord, and the Father is God and the Son is God, since he who is born of God is God, and in this way, according to His being and power and essence, one God is demonstrated: but according to the economy of our salvation, there is both Father and Son (On the Apostolic Preaching 2:1:47).

Did Irenaeus see the one God as triune?

I have also largely demonstrated, that the Word, namely the Son, was always with the Father, and that Wisdom also, which is the Spirit, was present with Him, anterior to all creation…There is therefore one God, who by the Word and Wisdom created and arranged all things (Against Heresies 4:20:3-4).

The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord…and God, and Saviour, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father (Against Heresies 1:10:1).

In conclusion, Ignatius, Polycarp, and Irenaeus weren’t creating new doctrines that were contrary to what they had received from John. Other church fathers at this same time received the same teachings and passed them on through their writings. The LDS Church has diverted from these teachings and accepted heretical teachings that were denounced very early on by some of these same church fathers. We will examine one of these heretical teachings in the next article.

§

In this last article we will examine one of the heretical distortions of the doctrine of the Trinity as embraced by Mormonism. As was noted earlier, Mormonism doesn’t look favorably on the ecumenical councils that took place long ago in Christianity. Why were these councils called in the first place? The primary reason was because of heresy creeping into the church, unfortunately, by those in the church that were going astray theologically, thus causing others to join them. These instigators of heretical teachings could not be ignored and had to be addressed. Their heretical teachings were a diversion from the faith and a pollution of the gospel that emphatically began with the understanding that there is one God (monotheism) and Jesus Christ was God in human flesh (His deity: fully God and fully man).

Early Christians didn’t have their theology formulated and worked out in fine details like Christians do today. It took several hundred years putting this together as the Christians studied the Scriptures in light of incoming heresies. Heresies that impacted Christianity did have positive outcomes. For example, the heresy of Marcionism forced Christians to carefully examine those books written by the apostles or other inspired writers that were authoritative, which brought about the canon of inspired Scripture. Regarding creeds, the Christians were forced to examine their beliefs in light of Scripture, forming creedal statements of belief that conversely resulted in a rejection of heretical teachings. The ancient creeds of the Christian Church are merely statements of belief that are based on Scripture. The Church is defined by what it believes. In modern times we call these “doctrinal statements.” In Christianity these doctrinal statements come from the ancient creeds that summarize what the Church believes and, indirectly, doesn’t believe. Every church, sect, or religion has these statements of belief that are essentially the same things as creeds. The LDS Church is no exception. Instead of the word creed the LDS Church calls their statement of beliefs Articles of Faith. These are synonymous terms no matter how vigorously the LDS Church tries to redefine or spin it (as they do many other words) in a desperate attempt to appear different from other religions — or to demonstrate their vitriol against the early church ecumenical councils.

Why did these heresies come up in the first place? Did these occur outside of God’s will and control? Christians believe and worship a God that is sovereign over all things and that includes all that takes place in the world and the times that they occur (providence). All things come to pass exactly at the moment in history that God wants it to occur. The writings of the early church fathers (ante-Nicene), the ecumenical councils, the close of the canon of Scripture, the formulation of theology, and creedal statements of belief all came to pass exactly according to God’s sovereign plan. Yes, this includes heresies. Defining, sharpening, and filtering correct theology according to the Scriptures brings glory and honor to God. God does all things for that purpose.

One of the distortions of the doctrine of the Trinity that the Mormons are guilty is tritheism. What is tritheism? It’s simply this:

• The concept of the Triune God (3 in 1) cannot be rationalized so it should be rejected.
• There are three separate Gods who are equal and who are united in purpose.
• Each God is distinct and separate.

Mormonism rejects the unity of substance between the Persons in the Trinity and especially emphasizes each Person as being distinct and separate(according to Joseph Smith). Christianity affirms that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons, but the Persons are not distinct and separate (as two words together) because the Persons cannot be separated due to their having the same nature. Mormonism states the doctrine can’t be understood rationally by human beings; therefore, the doctrine should be rejected. The belief in a plurality of gods is polytheism and is at the core of the tritheism heresy. Joseph Smith was very clearly a proponent of tritheism:

I will preach on the plurality of plurality of Gods…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 personage and three Gods. If this is in accordance with the New Testament, lo and behold! We have three Gods anyhow, and they are plural (History of the Church 6:474).

Smith further stated:

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…All are to be crammed into one God, according to sectarianism. It would make the biggest God in all the world. He would be a wonderfully big God – he would be a giant or a monster (History of the Church 6:476).

I heard a popular philosopher describe the Trinity as the three-headed Roman and Greek mythological creature named Cerberus. Maybe this is what Smith had in mind.

Smith’s ridicule based on his human rationale doesn’t make the doctrine false. This rationalization of the nature of God has led the Mormons astray in other ways as well based on Smith’s sermon. Smith’s teaching of a plurality of separate Gods is contrary to the teachings of the Bible. Mormons attempt to rationalize from the Bible what they cannot understand. However, Mormons don’t apply this same process to some of their own doctrines that they believe are beyond the human mind to comprehend. However, they readily acknowledge their own doctrinal headaches that result from attempting to rationalize a god hatched in the mind of Joseph Smith and given to the Mormon people. Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt gives us a good example:

We were begotten by our Father in Heaven; the person of our Father in Heaven was begotten on a previously heavenly world by His Father; and again, He was begotten by a still more ancient Father; and so on, from generation to generation, from one heavenly world to another still more ancient, until our minds are wearied and lost in the multiplicity of generations and successive worlds, and as a last resort, we wonder in our minds, how far back the genealogy extends, and how the first world was formed, and the first father was begotten. (The Seer, p. 132)

The Bible is very clear throughout the Old and New Testaments that there is only one God (Deut 4:35; 6:4; 1 Kings 8:60; Isaiah 43:10-11; 44:6, 8; 45:5-6, 21-22; 46:9; Mark 12:29, 32; 1 Cor 8:4-6; Eph 4:4-6; 1 Tim 2:5, etc.). Yes, there are gods and lords, which are idols, but they are not God by nature (Gal 4:8). Mark 12:29 is especially important because Jesus is quoting The Shema of Deuteronomy 6:4. If anyone would have known whether there were other gods out there it would have been Jesus Christ, and He affirms that there is only one God. God, the Eternal Sovereign, had rightly chosen not to reveal all things pertaining to His Being and purposes to mere human beings. What should have humankind stumped and giving God praise continually is that He chose to reveal anything about Himself to us; He certainly didn’t have to! He could have left the entire human race in its sin without any Savior to redeem it from its rebellion. God is not under any obligation to human beings. Joseph Smith would not accept what God said in Deuteronomy 29:29:

The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever, that we may observe all the words of this law.

It appears that Smith wanted all things revealed by God in order to accept it on faith based on the revealed Scriptures. Mormonism has very clear verses in their scriptures that attest to there only being one God, and yet states that this is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. That sounds very Trinitarian:

Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal, without end (D&C 20:28).

And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen (The Testimony of the Three Witnesses [to the Book of Mormon]).

Mormons will say that the Father, Son, and Spirit are three Gods that are united only in purpose but not nature or substance. However, our Mormon friends cannot demonstrate from the Bible or the Book of Mormon three separate Gods that are united only in purpose. The Bible clearly reveals one God revealed in three Persons united in nature, eternality, and purpose. Mormonism’s rejection of the Trinity while embracing tritheism will continue to segregate this 19^th century religious movement from historical, orthodox Christianity.