It's not my interpretation, you just have to read it in context. In both sections, you need to read it fully and in context.

I Corinthians 15 go to www.biblegateway.com  they have many different versions of the Bible to choose from.  You have to read it for what it is.

v. 41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.

Just like there will be a difference in our bodies, from earthly to heavently, there IS a difference between the sun, moon, and stars.  These are not ONE thing, there ARE differences between the sun, moon and stars.  Again, you need to read the entire chapter and in particular that section of the chapter, beginning with v20-49.

Umm, this has nothing to do with arguing against the Trinity.  Let's post the whole passage so we know what Paul is talking about.

1Co 15:35  But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
1Co 15:36  Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
1Co 15:37  And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:
1Co 15:38  But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.
1Co 15:39  All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.
1Co 15:40  There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
1Co 15:41  There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
1Co 15:42  So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
1Co 15:43  It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
1Co 15:44  It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
1Co 15:45  And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
1Co 15:46  Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
1Co 15:47  The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
1Co 15:48  As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
1Co 15:49  And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

Summary:

As there are vastly different bodies and forms in God's created Universe which are suited for all kinds of existence, so God can design a body perfect for resurrection life.

In response to you and moinmoin trying to use John 17:21 out of context. 

Let's look a little earlier in the chapter in verse 5

John 17:5  And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

Let's cross reference that with

Isa 48:11  For mine own sake, even for mine own sake, will I do it: for how should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory unto another.

The only God in existence has the Glory, and he shares it with no one, because he is the only one who is worthy of it.

You ask, why is Jesus asking for the Father's Glory?  Well read Philippians 2, and you will read how the Son humbled himself and left his Glory to come to earth and die for the sins for all who believes in him.   That is what the incarnation is about.  Jesus on earth still desired the Glory he had in heaven, The Glory that according to Isa 48:11 he doesn't share with anybody.

3 persons, who is one being, God.  

Please now recognize that the god you're worshipping is an idol and not the same God the Bible talks about. 

Different sects exist, however Scriptures does have one absolute truth, and that is why myself and itsa keeps stressing context.

And of course, every sect thinks that it knows the truth and all others are, in some way,  in error. Thats why we call it faith. In the past 2000 years great atrocities have been committed by Christians who were certain that they had an exclusive understanding of the truth, with the concurrent right to convert or kill all dissenters.

I don't see where I say that.

I guess being a Mormon it's easy for you to misinterpet things Ha Ha, I had to throw that in there, J/K....or am I

  I said I believe in absolute Truth.

And like I said, there are THREE persons of the ONE being of God.

The Son had the Glory with the Father(John 17:5), and God doesn't share his glory(Isa 48:11).

I don't think you really understand how we define the Trinity.

The Bible teaches that there is but one being of God, yet there are three Persons who share this one being of God: the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. Each Person is fully and completely God, each is described in Scripture as possessing the attributes of God. The Father, Son, and Spirit have eternally existed in the relationship.  Christians describe this by the term "Trinity."

Mainstream Christianity does not accept Mormonism as a Christian religion or sect, for a great number of things...the way Mormonism interprets the Trinity is just one of them.

I will have to respond to these other posts a little later.

I didn't bring it up. ista did.

what did I bring up?

I appreciate that you have shown interest in Church History.  I believe you have shown that you know more about Church History then most Christians.  I just want to say, that regardless of what individuals have done and believed doesn't invalidate what God says in the Bible, the Word of God survived the test of time.  The Reformers fought and risked death so that all can read those truths, and that one Man shouldn't be the one to interpret it for the people. 

God who is Soverign has used those men and event's for his purpose and plan.  We can even see in the Bible how God has used corrupted men and events for his purpose and plan.

Justification by faith alone! Soli Deo Gloria!

I agree, and in no way intended to castigate all of Christianity for the actions of some. The point that I was trying to make was that,over the centuries, many groups have seen different paths to salvation. As religion is based on faith, such groups must, if they believe they know the way, believe that the others are, to some degree or another, in error. To use your example: When Luther had his epiphany after reading Rom.3:28, and declared that justification was by faith alone, he was logically forced to conclude that the Catholic view that faith, works, and the Church, were required for salvation, was in error. The sola you quote , and the other four, were the reformers way of declaring this fact. I personally prefer the more inclusive John 14:2.

Thanks for your comment and clarification.  I agree with you that one group's faith should believe the other group's faith to a degree are in error.  We stil see that today, and we even see that in the bible(ie. Pharisees believed what Jesus and his apostles taught were in error)

 When you say you prefer the more inclusive John 14:2, are you interpreting this verse in meaning universal salvation(meaning all will be saved)?

I will agree that general Americans and textbooks lump Mormon and Jehovah Witness and other groups as Christians.  However the dictionary is not the final authority in defining what is truth.  The Holy Bible is the Final Authority and according to God's word,  those groups are not Christians. (Meaning they are not following the true Christ, they are following a "different christ and different gospel"  Matt 24:5, Gal 1:8 )

Perhaps Baptist and other what I would call True Christians, would not mind if Mormons and  Jehovah Witness and other  sects would call themselves Christians if they would clarify which Christ they are following. 

Yea a Christian is a follower of Christ, so which christ are you following? 

Jesus Christ is not the spirit-brother of Lucifer, and just one of many gods, but  that He is the eternal God of creation(including creating Lucifer) who died on the cross for the sins of those who believe in him.

So since it's the Mormons and the Jehovah Witnesses that have to use extra biblical material to define their faith, they should be the ones to say, I'm a christian, follower of the christ taught by Joseph Smith or I'm a christian follower of the christ taught by Charles Taze Russell.

Obviously that is not going to happen, and was an extreme example, but I want to drive home the point, we don't believe in the same Christ, therefore Christian "follower of Christ" can be(should be) offensive to Christians. 

EEE, answer to your question - I interpret an inclusive view of John 14:2 to mean that there are many ways to salvation by those who follow Christ. Thus, Catholics, Orthodox, Baptist, Methodist, Lutherans, and yes even LDS and JWs may differ in doctrine and even hold beliefs that others consider to be in grave error, but in the fundamental belief in Christ as the path to salvation they are in agreement. To me, thats what makes them Christian. We may have to agree to disagree  (cordially) on this issue.

Since the churches you listed add and/or subtract from the Bible at will, how do we explain Revelation 21:18-20 (KJV), (the last 3 verses in the New Testament).