Tag Archives: Mormonism

Do Mormons Worship the God of the Bible? Part 5

Post Author:  Darrell

From a biblical perspective, there are several issues with the Mormon view of God the Father as described in the previous post. First, contrary to Mormon teachings, the Bible says very clearly that God is not, nor has He ever been, a man. Num. 23:19 says, “God is not man [emphasis mine], that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind.” First Sam. 15:29 says, “And also the Glory of Israel will not lie or have regret, for he is not a man [emphasis mine], that he should have regret.”

In addition, the Bible repeatedly says that there are no Gods other than God the Father. As a result, the Mormon teachings that God the Father has a father who was God prior to Him and that man can progress to become a God himself contradict the Bible. Isa. 43:10 says, “You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.” Isa. 44:6 says, “Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: ‘I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.’” The Lord continues this point in verse 8 of the same chapter where He further declares, “Is there a God besides me? There is no Rock; I know not any.”

Second, the Mormon understanding of the word God as an honorific title is completely incompatible with biblical teachings. As the previously cited verses demonstrate, scripture is very emphatic that there are no other Gods besides God the Father, and, as a consequence, He has always been God. As a result, it is impossible for Him to have earned the title God, because God is something that He has always been; it is something He simply is.

Third, contrary to Mormon teachings, the Bible says that God and man are separate and distinct in nature and, as a result, are not the same species. Since God has always existed as God, He is uncreated and self-existent in nature. In contrast, humans are contingent in being, i.e., they are dependent upon God for their very existence. God is the only being in existence that is not contingent upon anything else for his existence. In Exod. 3:14, God gives us a small glimpse into this fact about His nature: “God said to Moses, ‘I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: “I AM has sent me to you”.'” Speaking of this verse, Bible Commentator James E. Smith says, “The statement ‘I am who I am’ can be rendered a number of different ways in English. The statement basically emphasizes the timelessness of God. He is the self-existing one, the Eternal, the one without beginning or end.” In addition, The Apologetics Study Bible says, “Exod. 3:14 actually teaches a distinction between God and humans. God alone is the eternal, self-existing one. Humans are created beings.” Consequently, the Mormon idea that God and man, the uncreated and the created, the self-existent and the contingent, are the same species is completely illogical and foreign to the Bible.

In the next post, I will look at the LDS teachings on the nature of Christ as compared to the Bible.

Do Mormons Worship the God of the Bible? Part 4

Post Author: Darrell

Historically there have been a variety of Mormon views regarding the nature of God the Father. The purpose of this post is not to address every single strain of LDS thought that exists in this area, nor do I contend that all Mormons hold the beliefs to which I will speak. Instead, I will address some of the traditional, longstanding LDS beliefs regarding the nature of the Father. These beliefs are spoken to in canonized LDS scripture, transcend Mormon thought, and affect LDS beliefs in other areas.

As discussed in the previous posts, Joseph Smith claimed that God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him in the spring of 1820, and, as a result, the members of the LDS Church believe God the Father and Jesus Christ to be separate and distinct beings embodied in flesh and bone. However, Mormon teachings did not stop developing at this point. On April 6, 1844, Smith delivered one of his last public speeches, known today as The King Follett Discourse. During this discourse, he shared one of Mormonism’s most controversial doctrines, namely, that God Himself is an exalted man: “God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens. That is the great secret.”

The current version of the LDS Temple Endowment Ceremony furthers this doctrine by teaching that God the Father gained his knowledge through a process similar to the one through which Adam, Eve, and the rest of mankind progress. In a re-creation of a scene in the Garden of Eden, the ceremony shows Satan, speaking to Eve, saying, “I want you to eat of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, that your eyes may be opened, for that is the way Father gained his knowledge[emphasis mine].” Former Brigham Young University Professor of Philosophy, David Paulsen, spoke to this doctrine in his 1975 Doctoral Thesis titled Comparative Coherency of Mormon (Finitistic) and Classical (Absolutistic) Theism: “At some distant point in an infinite past, He earned the right to be ‘God’ through a process which men, as his children, are now repeating.”

The Mormon doctrine that God was once a man has led many LDS to the position that God is merely a title a being holds. Again, Paulsen addressed this fact in his Thesis, saying, “The being who is God has not always been God – i.e., he has not always qualified for the honorific title ‘God’ – a distinction he earned through a process of growth and development toward Godliness.” Naturally, the fact that God the Father has not always been God leads to some logical questions. Who was God before God the Father? From where did God the Father come? Smith provided an answer to these questions by teaching that God the Father had a father, much the same as all human beings: “Where was there ever a son without a father? And where was there ever a father without first being a son?”

Mormonism furthers this by teaching that God and man are the same species. Past Mormon Apostle Bruce R. McConkie said, “Man and God are of the same race.” In How Wide the Divide, Mormon Scholar David Robinson states that Mormons “believe that God and humans are the same species of being and that all men and women were his spiritual offspring in a premortal existence.” In addition, The LDS Church teaches that man, through a process known as Eternal Progression, can progress to become a God. Smith said, “You have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you, − namely, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one, − from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation.”

This teaching is also referenced in The Doctrine and Covenants where it says, “Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.”

In the next post, I will cite several areas where these LDS beliefs violate the teachings of the Bible.  Hang around!

Do Mormons Worship the God of the Bible? Part 3

Post Author: Darrell

As discussed in the last post, the Mormon Church teaches that God the Father has a body of flesh and bone. Unfortunately for Mormons, there are biblical problems with this teaching. John 4:24 says, “God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” This verse has long been held as a declaration regarding God’s nature as spirit. The Bible Knowledge Commentary has this to say regarding this verse: “God is Spirit is a better translation than the KJV‘s ‘God is a Spirit.’. . . . This is a declaration of His invisible nature. He is not confined to one location.” In addition, Col. 1:15 teaches that Christ “is the image of the invisible [emphasis mine] God,” and 1 Tim. 1:17 says, “To the King of ages, immortal, invisible [emphasis mine], the only God.”

The understanding that God is invisible and spirit lines up perfectly in a metaphysical sense with the biblical declaration that God is omnipresent. For, if God were embodied in flesh and bone, He would be metaphysically incapable of being in more than one place at a time. However, scripture testifies repeatedly of the fact that God is everywhere present. Ps. 139:7-8 makes it very clear that no matter where we go, God is always there: “Where shall I go from your Spirit? Or where shall I flee from your presence? If I ascend to heaven, you are there! If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there!” In addition, 1 Kings 8:27 testifies that there is nothing that can contain God, for He is everywhere: “But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain you; how much less this house that I have built!” Furthermore, in Jer. 23:23-24, God Himself testifies of His omnipresent nature, making it one of the clearest passages of scripture to testify of God being everywhere: “Am I a God at hand, declares the Lord, and not a God far away? Can a man hide himself in secret places so that I cannot see him? declares the Lord. Do I not fill heaven and earth? declares the Lord.”

These passages leave Mormons in a quandary, for the nature of their God is wholly incompatible with the above descriptions. In contrast, the Mormon God is not simply spirit, rather he is a spirit that is contained in and embodied in flesh. As a result, the Mormon God is limited, e.g., He is limited by his body to a here rather than a there. In addition, the very nature of having a body means that He is contained by that body and cannot fill heaven and earth. Instead, He can fill only His flesh and bone.

It appears that James E.  Talmage recognized these problems and simply chose to admit that the God of Mormonism cannot be everywhere. He said, “It has been said, therefore, that God is everywhere present; but this does not mean that the actual person of any one member of the Godhead can be physically present in more than one place at a time. . . . His person cannot be in more than one place at any one time. Unfortunately for Talmage and all other Mormons, the writers of the books of the Bible, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, have clearly testified to the contrary. As a result, the nature of the Mormon God does not simply contradict a late developed teaching of an apostate Christianity; rather it contradicts the Bible itself.

Do Mormons Worship the God of the Bible? Part 2

Post Author: Darrell

The nature of the Mormon Godhead bears some similarity to the Arian heresy of the early Christian church. Arius taught that God the Father and Jesus Christ are two separate beings distinct in nature, with Christ being a subordinate God. In similar respects, Mormonism teaches that God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit are literally three separate beings with three distinct natures. James E. Talmage explained the nature of the Mormon Godhead in A Study of the Articles of Faith when he said, “Three personages composing the great presiding council of the universe have revealed themselves to man: (1) God the Eternal Father; (2) His Son, Jesus Christ; and (3) the Holy Ghost.  That these three are separate individuals, physically distinct from each other, is demonstrated by the accepted records of divine dealings with man.”

The belief that the three persons of the Godhead have separate and distinct natures originated with Joseph Smith’s First Vision claim. According to his writings in The Pearl of Great Price, Smith was visited by God the Father and Jesus Christ in the spring of 1820 in answer to a prayer regarding which church to join. Smith said:

I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me. It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air.  One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other – This is My Beloved Son, Hear Him!

Mormons believe that these two beings were God the Father and Jesus Christ. As a result, they believe that Christ and the Father are separate beings and that the traditional Christian teaching on the nature of God, i.e., one God in nature who eternally exists in three persons, is a false, late development of Christianity that is foreign to the Bible.

Further derived from the First Vision is the belief that God the Father and Jesus Christ have bodies of flesh and bone just as man. In 2007, former Prophet of the LDS Church, Gordon B. Hinckley, said, “And so in 1820, in that incomparable vision, the Father and the Son appeared to the boy Joseph. They spoke to him with words that were audible, and he spoke to Them. . . .  They were beings tabernacled in flesh. And out of that experience has come our unique and true understanding of the nature of Deity.” This belief is detailed out in the Mormon scripture titled The Doctrine and Covenants, where it says, “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also.” Talmage said, “Therefore we know that both the Father and the Son are in form and stature perfect men; each of them possesses a tangible body, infinitely pure and perfect and attended by transcendent glory, nevertheless a body of flesh and bones.”

The belief that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three separate beings creates numerous problems for the LDS claim to be following the God of the Bible, for it is in utter conflict with the Bible on numerous counts. Deut. 6:4 says, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.” This verse is known as the Shema and is the basic confession of the Jewish faith. With this statement, Israel acknowledged the unity of God and placed their belief in stark contrast with that of their polytheistic Near East neighbors. There is little doubt that the Jewish belief in the unity and oneness of God, which the Shema clearly communicates, is utterly incompatible with the tri-theistic nature of the Mormon Godhead.

There are a multitude of other scriptures that can be cited to demonstrate that the Mormon idea of three separate Gods existing in the Godhead is completely foreign to the nature of God as taught in the Bible; however, space will only permit me to mention a few. Isa. 44:8 says, “Is there a God besides me? There is no Rock; I know not any.” Deut. 4:35 says, “To you it was shown, that you might know that the Lord is God; there is no other besides him.” As if stating this once was not strong enough, in Mark 12, a Scribe cited Deut. 4:35 when commenting on one of Christ’s answers to the Pharisees where Jesus referenced Deut. 6:4. Jesus’ citation of the Shema as part of the greatest commandment underscores its importance and is further declaration of God’s unity. In addition, the Scribe’s acknowledgement that Christ’s answer was good, and his use of Deut. 4:35 to support this fact further emphasizes the biblical declaration of the unity of God, a fact that is completely devastating to the Mormon belief in a tri-theistic Godhead.

In the next post, we will look at the problems created by the LDS decleration that God the Father has a body of flesh and bone.  Stay tuned.

Do Mormons Worship the God of the Bible? Part 1

Post Author: Darrell

In its short 180 year life, the Mormon Church has had a curious relationship with traditional Christianity. A quick look through Mormon history will demonstrate that the LDS Church has a long history of degrading Christian teachings. As a result, it is somewhat odd to find modern day LDS leaders referring to their church as a Christian denomination, for their desire to be denominated among groups they believe to be in utter error seems illogical.

Mormonism is founded upon the belief that it is not simply a Christian denomination, but is, rather, the restoration of true Christianity.  This belief is based upon the claim by the founder of Mormonism, Joseph Smith, that God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him and called him as a prophet. Smith relates that in the course of their visit, Christ and the Father had some rather terse words regarding traditional Christianity:

I was answered that I must join none of [the Christian churches], for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof” [emphasis mine].

The belief that God holds the Christian creeds to be an abomination and all the Christian professors to be corrupt has led to some rather interesting statements by Mormon leaders. On July 26, 1857, second Prophet and President of the Mormon Church, Brigham Young, said that the Christian world is “like the captain and crew of a vessel on the ocean without a compass, and tossed to and fro whithersoever the wind listed to blow them. When the light came to [him], [he] saw that all the so−called Christian world was groveling in darkness.” On September 13, later the same year, Young said, “Ask them where heaven is? − where they are going to when they die? − where Paradise is? − and there is not a priest in the world that can answer your questions. Ask them what kind of a being our Heavenly Father is, and they cannot tell you so much as Balaam’s ass told him. They are more ignorant than children.” On September 16, 1860, he said, “The Christian world, so called, are heathens as to their knowledge of the salvation of God.”

Third Prophet of the LDS Church, John Taylor, also had some rather crude remarks regarding traditional Christianity. On January 17, 1858, he called Christianity “a perfect pack of nonsense.” On November 1, later the same year, he said, “Are Christians ignorant? Yes, as ignorant of the things of God as the brute beast.” In addition, he shared what is perhaps his most stinging comment on May 6, 1870, when he said, “What does the Christian world know about God? Nothing; yet these very men assume the right and power to tell others what they shall and what they shall not believe in. Why, so far as the things of God are concerned, they are the veriest [sic] fools; they know neither God nor the things of God.”

While the LDS Church appears to have toned down its rhetoric in recent years, the basic belief that it is the one and only true church on earth and that traditional Christianity was and is apostate remains unchanged. LDS Apostle James E. Talmage said in his 1965 book A Study of the Articles of Faith, that after the ministry of Jesus Christ “the Church was literally driven from the earth,” and that it remained in this state until the “restoration was effected by the Lord through the Prophet Joseph Smith.” In a 1972 Ensign article, LDS Apostle LeGrand Richards said, “At the time that Joseph Smith had his marvelous vision, there wasn’t a church in the world worshiping the God who made the heavens and the earth and the sea and the fountains of waters, and created man in his own image.”

As these comments demonstrate, the LDS Church continues to hold the longstanding belief that traditional Christianity is in utter error and that the Mormon Church is the only true church on the earth today. In addition, the comments demonstrate that even the leaders of the LDS Church realize the utter gulf that exists between the teachings of traditional Christianity and the teachings of the LDS Church. Because of these stark differences, traditional Christian teachings and LDS teachings cannot both be true, for if Mormons are correct about the nature of God, then Christians are in complete error. However, if Christians are correct about the nature of God, Mormons are in complete error. Consequently, the question left for discussion is exactly which teachings are correct. Are the teachings of the LDS Church correct? Are they in alignment with the Bible? I will explore these questions in the next few posts by highlighting three specific areas where the God of Mormonism differs from the God of the Bible.  Stick around.

Time, The Succession of Moments, and An Actual Infinite

Post Author:  Darrell

I recently did a couple of posts regarding the incoherence of an actual infinite and how, as a result, the eternality of matter as taught in Mormonism is impossible.  These posts can be found here and here.

I want to address another way of analyzing the concept of “eternal matter” as taught in the Mormon Church.  Let’s assume for a moment that an actual infinite is possible; could matter have always existed, i.e., could it be eternal?  Unfortunately for Mormons who hold to creation ex materia, the answer is a resounding “no.”

According to Einstein’s Theory of Relativity if matter has always existed, time has always existed, for time and matter are relative, i.e., you can’t have one without the other.   In addition, if time has always existed, the past is actually infinite.  In otherwords, prior to today there have existed an actually infinite number of moments (see the above referenced posts which discussed this fact).  However, time is a series of events or moments formed by successive addition, and it is impossible to form an actual infinite through successive addition. 

In successive addition, the collection is instantiated sequentially.  For example, if I am given one M&M at a time, no matter how many M&M’s I receive it is always possible for me to be given “one more.”  Thus, one could never say that I have an actually infinite number of M&M’s. 

In the same sense, since time is formed through successive addition, i.e., one moment followed by another, no matter how much time has passed, more time is always possible.  You can always have “one more moment.”  As a result, it is never possible to say that prior to today there has been an actually infinite amount of time.   

There are additional philosophical issues with eternal matter and the succession of moments in a beginningless/eternal universe.  Paul Copan and William Lane Craig share some of their thoughts in The New Mormon Challenge.

In order for us to have “arrived” at today, existence has, so to speak, traversed an infinite number of prior events.  But before the present event could arrive, the event immediately prior to it would have to arrive; and before that event could arrive, the event immediately prior to it would have to arrive; and so on ad infinitum.  No event could ever arrive, since before it could elapse there would always be one more event that had to have happened first.  Thus, if the series of past event were beginningless, the present event could not have arrived, which is absurd! (Copan and Craig, The New Mormon Challenge, Zondervan, 2002, 135)

The temporal series of events we call time cannot be actually infinite, and as a result, the universe, time, and matter all had to have a beginning.  The universe could not have been created ex materia, for eternal matter is impossible.  In addition to the the philosophical arguments, there is a wealth of scientific data to support the finite nature of matter, time, and the universe.  It can easily be said that nearly all signs point towards creation ex nihilo just as traditional Christianity has been declaring for nearly 2000 years.

God Bless!

Darrell

Are Experiences Reliable Tests For Truth?

Post Author:  Darrell

Some religious organizations emphasize that knowledge of truth is obtained through an experience.  For example, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS Church) proclaims to be the only true church of Jesus Christ on the earth today, and they encourage those researching the church to gain a Testimony (belief/knowledge) of the truthfulness of The Book of Mormon and church by praying and receiving a spiritual witness.  Their missionaries typically refer to Moroni 10:4 in The Book of Mormon.

And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.   

Many Mormons say they have followed this teaching and have prayed and received an answer via an experience.  Some claim to have had a burning in the bosom; others a warm feeling in their heart; and still others say they have had visions and/or spiritual manifestations. 

At first glance Moroni’s challenge appears harmless; after all, it is simply encouraging us to ask God.  However, a closer analysis reveals several problems and dangers with this proposition.

First, looking closely at the verse, one notices that it has setup a scenario where the answer can never be no, for it specifically states that if you ask with real intent, a sincere heart, and faith in Christ, you will be told that it is true.  As a result, if you pray and receive no for an answer, the automatic assumption, based upon the verse, is that you do not have a sincere heart, real intent, or faith in Christ.  In fact, while I was LDS, it was not uncommon to hear the missionaries challenge people who had not received a positive answer to “exercise more faith” and “keep praying.” 

Second, the verse completely overlooks the fact that God has warned us that some spirits are evil.  They will masquerade as true spirits from God, but will teach false Christs and false gospels.  1 John 4:1 cautions us about believing every spirit and commands us to test them.

Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 

As a result, praying and receiving a spiritual witness is not sufficient to demonstrate that a church or book are in fact true, for the spiritual witness could be from a false spirit. 

Third, using an experience as a test for truth has several philosophical problems. 

  1. No experience as such is either true or false. An experience is something we have; it is a condition of persons. But truth is something we express; it is a characteristic of propositions, e.g., Mormonism is true or not true. Hence, no experience as such is true; only expressions about the experience can be true.
  2. No experience is logically connected with the truth of a worldview or belief. Logical necessity is a characteristic of propositions (as noted above) not of experience. Truth statements can be uttered without the experience and one can have an experience without uttering a truth statement. Therefore, no experience is logically connected with any given truth statement.
  3. An experience cannot be used to prove the truth of that particular experience. To use an experience to prove its own truth is begging the whole question. The only truth established by an experience is the truth that one has had that experience. Therefore, an experience cannot be used to prove the truth of that experience.
  4. Experiences are not self interpreting. Experiences do not come with unchallengeable truth labels on them, and the same experience is capable of different interpretations depending upon the overall framework one gives to it. Therefore, no experience as such is an adequate test for the truth of a worldview or belief.

Spiritual experiences can be and often are wonderful aspects of faith.  They help to bring the abstract knowledge of our faith into reality, provide comfort in times of pain, and bring us closer to God.  However, looking solely to an experience as the ultimate test of truth is very dangerous.  God has warned us that Satan will transform himself into an angel of light in an attempt to deceive us (2 Cor. 11:14).  Consequently, we should not look to experiences alone to discover if something is true.  We should also look to God’s special revelation, the Bible, and use its teachings as a standard by which all proclamations of truth are judged.  2 Timothy 3:16 puts is so well.

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness…

Praise God that He has preserved His Word for us!

Joseph Smith’s “New Translation”of Romans 4:4-5

Post Author: Darrell

Romans 4:4-5 are two absolutely beautiful verses of scripture, for they put the gospel message into thirty-five short words. The King James Version reads as follows.

Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. [emphasis mine]

What a glorious message!! We don’t work to get to God. In fact, we can’t! Instead, God justifies us when we don’t work, i.e., when we seek not to justify ourselves and simply trust in God for our salvation.

The founder of the LDS Church, Joseph Smith, revised portions of the Bible that he believed to be in error. His work was published by Herald Publishing House and is titled Joseph Smith’s “New Translation” of the Bible. In addition, Smith’s alterations are included in the LDS Publication of the King James Version of the Bible.

Romans 4:4-5 contains, in my opinion, one of Smith’s more startling changes. It reads as follows.

Now to him who is justified by the law of works, is the reward reckoned, not of grace, but of debt. But to him who seeketh not to be justified by the law of works, but believeth on him who justifieth not the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. [emphasis mine]

Besides the fact that Smith destroyed a beautiful piece of scripture, there are numerous problems with his “translation”. First, there is absolutely no support in the Greek for the addition of the word not after justifieth. In Greek the word for not is mē. only appears once in the original Greek version of verse 5, being applied to ergazomenō, the word that has been translated as works.

As a result, there are no grounds in the Greek for Smith applying not to justifieth. Of course, no student of Mormonism will find this surprising as Smith demonstrated little regard for his source text in most all of his translations. When the papyrus that he “translated” The Book of Abraham from was later analyzed by experts, it was discovered to be nothing more than an Egyptian Funeral Text, having absolutely nothing to do with Abraham. So much for Smith’s attention to detail!

A second problem with Smith’s addition of not is that it is counter intuitive to Paul’s entire message in Romans. In the first three chapters, Paul builds the case for how all of mankind is ungodly.

Romans 2:1 says, “You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgement on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgement do the same things.” [emphasis added]

Romans 3:10 says, “There is no one righteous, not even one… .” [emphasis added]

Romans 3:12 says, “…there is no one who does good, not even one.” [emphasis added]

As these verses demonstrate, Paul believed and preached that all mankind is unrighteous and in need of a Savior. Therefore, the idea of him stating that God does not justify the ungodly makes no sense, for he held the view that everyone is ungodly! Unfortunately for Mormons who believe Smith to be a prophet of God, it appears that Smith’s “prophetic” ability failed him in his task of “correcting” the Bible. In reality, he completely overlooked these verses when he so willingly added the word not.

Fortunately, those who trust in Christ for their salvation need not worry about Smith’s butchery of the Bible. We are knowledgable of the fact that God does, in fact, justify the ungodly. We realize how ungodly we truly are, and we realize that our salvation is not dependent upon anything that we do. Instead, it is dependent upon Him, and He has already paid the price.

All praise be to our Lord, God, and Savior, Jesus Christ!

Darrell

Mormon Challenge

Post Author:  Darrell

Brigham City, Utah’s Living Hope Ministries has produced several great videos on Mormonism, including DNA vs. The Book of Mormon and The Bible vs. The Book of Mormon.  If you are looking for some material to share with an LDS neighbor or friend, I would highly recommend both of these videos. 

Thanks to a post on Jessica’s blog, I recently discovered that Living Hope is in the final stages of completing their newest video:  The Bible vs. Joseph Smith.  I can’t wait to see their fine work on this one.  Here is a link to their website and a clip from the video.  Check it out!

http://mormonchallenge.com/index.html

Darrell

Is An Actual Infinite Coherent? Part 2

Post Author:  Darrell

In my last post I discussed how an actual infinite number of things is incoherent.  How does this apply to the universe, time, and Mormonism?

The Mormon Church denies creation ex nihilo, choosing instead to teach creation ex materia, the position that God organized the universe from pre-existing matter.  In fact, Mormonism takes this position even a step further, teaching that matter, the stuff everything is made of, has always existed.

Time and matter are relative, i.e., one cannot exist without the other (see Einstein’s theory of relativity).  Therefore, if matter has always existed, time has always existed.  Time is the succession of moments; in otherwords, one moment following another makes up time.  If time has always existed, prior to today there existed an actual infinite amount of time.  As a result, there were an actual infinite number of moments prior to today.

However, an actual infinite number of things is incoherent, and whatever is incoherent is impossible.  Therefore, an actual infinite number of moments prior to today, as well as the Mormon belief of the eternal existence of matter and the universe are all impossible.

Darrell