Tag Archives: Mormonism

Creation Ex Nihilo, General Apologetics, Philosophy

Is An Actual Infinite Coherent? Part 1

38 Comments

Post Author:  Darrell

In short, no.   The story of Hilbert’s Hotel helps to demonstrate this fact.  It goes like this…  Let’s say we have a hotel that has an infinite number of rooms and an infinite number of guests; as a result, the hotel is full.  If a prospective guest walks in and asks for a room, can he check in?  Since there are an infinite number of rooms, the answer must be “Yes.”  How about if an infinite number of guests arrive wanting to check in.  Can they?  Again, despite the fact that the hotel already has an infinite number of guests, since there are an infinite number of rooms, guests can always check in – even an infinite number more.

Now, let’s say that the guests in all of the odd-numbered rooms check out, how many guests are left?  There are an infinite number of total rooms.  However, there are also an infinite number of odd-numbered rooms, the guests of which checked out, and there are also an infinite number of even-numbered rooms, the ones still left occupied.  So in reality, there are still an infinite number of guests left in the hotel even though an infinite number of guests just checked out.  This means when you take an infinite away from an infinite, you still get an infinite.

Where does this leave us?  Even though Hilbert’s Hotel has an infinite number of guests and rooms, more rooms and guests can always be added.  In addition, no matter how many guests check out there will always be an infinite number of guests left.  As a result, the hotel could have a sign which reads, “Hilbert’s Hotel: Always full, Yet Rooms Are Always Available.”

This illustration points out how an actual infinite is incoherent.  In an actual infinite the whole and the parts are always equal.  You can take half away and still have an infinite, or you can add more and still have the same amount – an infinite.  However, in reality, a part can never equal a whole.  For example, two is part of four (half of it to be exact). Thus, two can never equal four.

Is there any infinite that is coherent?  Yes, a potential infinite.   A potential infinite is always finite and the whole is always greater than the parts.  In a potential infinite you can always add more, but it will never become actually infinite.  For example, let’s say you have 100 Jelly Beans in a pile.  You can always add more Jelly Beans to the pile.  In fact, you can continue to add Jelly Beans and never reach a maximum.  As a result, you could say that the pile you are creating as you add more is potentially infinite.  It is not an actual infinite because no matter how many you add, there are always a finite number of Jelly Beans in the pile.  However, it is potentially infinite because more can always be added.

In the next post, we will look at how the concept of an actual infinite applies to the universe, time, creation, and Mormonism.  Stick around.

Darrell

Free Will, General Apologetics, Mormonism, Philosophy, Theology

Can God Know Our Future Free Actions?

48 Comments

Post Author: Darrell

I recently had a conversation with Seth over on Markcares’s blog regarding God’s foreknowledge. Seth believes that man’s freedom is incompatible with God’s foreknowledge. As a result, he believes that God cannot know the future. Here are a couple of his comments.

A being is not “free” unless capable of acting otherwise than he ultimately does act. By definition, you cannot predict such a being’s choices.

An all-powerful God is no more capable of pre-determining a free choice than he is capable of creating a rock so large he cannot lift it.

First, allow me to say that I agree with Seth’s point that a being is not “free” unless he is capable of acting otherwise than he ultimately does act. However, this begs the question whether God’s perfect foreknowledge means that man cannot act otherwise.

If two positions are logically incompatible, then there is absolutely no way that both can be true at one and the same time. Therefore, if God’s foreknowledge and man’s freedom are logically contradictory, there is no way to explain how the two can both be true at one and the same time. If there is even one way in which these two positions can coexist, then the charge that they are logically contradictory fails.

The classic Christian position is that God exists outside of time, i.e., He is eternal. As a result, He does not view time in a linear fashion of yesterdays, todays, and tomorrows. Rather He sees time in one eternal now, being eternally present to all moments of time. This position allows God to see and know the future free acts of humans while not in any way violating their free choice.

As a helpful analogy, consider how well parents know their children. As a father, on many occasions I have been able to predict precisely what one of my children will do when faced with a certain situation. Did my foreknowledge of their future actions take away their freedom of choice? Of course not!! I had knowledge of what their future free actions would be; however, they made the choices themselves. If I as a finite time bound being have been able to do this a few times, imagine what a perfect, omnipotent, and infinite being existing outside of time is able to do.

Another problem with Seth’s position is that it contradicts the fact that God has prophesied the future free acts of humans beings repeatedly in the Bible. Consider the following prophesies given hundreds and sometimes even thousands of years before they occured.

1. That Jesus would be born of a virgin (Is. 7:14) – How did God know that Mary would remain a virgin after she was told she was pregnant?

2. Jesus would be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2) – How did God know exactly where Mary and Joseph would go and when they would go there?

3. Jesus would be rejected by the Jewish people (Ps. 22 and Is. 53) – How did God know that an entire race of people would reject Him?

4. Jesus would have His hands and feet pierced (Ps. 22:16) – How did God know that this is how His captors would kill him?

5. Jesus would be crucified with thieves (Is. 53:12) – How did God know that thieves would be in prison at the same time as Him and that the Romans would choose to crucify them along side Him?

6. Jesus’ side would be pierced (Zech. 12:10) – How did God know that they were going to do this?

7. Jesus would be buried in a rich man’s tomb (Is. 53:9) – How did God know that a rich man would be willing to do this and that the Romans would allow it?

8. The Roman soldiers would cast lots for His garments (Ps 22:18) – How did God know that the soldiers would even want to do this much less do it?

The Bible promises us that God is all powerful and tells us that we, as Christians, are in His tender care. What a wonderful promise!! He has perfect knowledge of all, and in Him we can find rest, knowing that our future is in His all loving and all powerful hands. All praise be to our Savior!

Darrell

Baptism, Mormonism, Top Ten Posts of 2009

Did Jesus Say Baptism Is Required For Entrance Into Heaven? – #3 Post of 2009

97 Comments

Post Author: Darrell

The LDS Church teaches that Baptism is required for entrance into The Celestial Kingdom (Heaven).  They often cite Christ’s conversation with Nicodemus in John chapter 3 as evidence to support their position.  However, a closer look at this conversation does not in fact support the Mormon view.  Let’s go through this conversation verse by verse.

“1Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him.” 3In reply Jesus declared, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.”  4“How can a man be born when he is old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb to be born!”

It is important to stop here and look closely at what Christ taught and what Nicodemus asked in return.  Christ said that a man must be “born again” to enter into heaven.  Nicodemus was confused by what Christ meant by “born again” and followed by asking how a man could “enter the womb” again to be re-born.  Keep this in mind.

“5Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of waterand the Spirit.”

It is at this point most Mormons will stop and say something to the effect of “See, Christ taught that you have to be born of water – Baptized – or you cannot go to heaven. ” I am willing to admit that if the conversation stopped here they might actually have a case.  Fortunately, Christ clarifies for us exactly what he means by born of water.

“6Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.“

Christ answers Nicodemus’s question of what born again is… how can a man “enter the womb” to be reborn.  Christ tells us that flesh gives birth to flesh when we are born the first time – of water from our mother’s womb.  Mormons get confused by what Christ meant by “born of water”.  It has nothing to do with baptism…. He was referring to being born of our mother.  However, Christ goes further to contrast this first birth with being “born again” of the Spirit.  This is the requirement for entrance into Heaven not baptism.

As you can see, this conversation does not teach that we must be baptized to enter Heaven.  Don’t get me wrong… I am not saying that baptism is a bad thing.  In reality it is a wonderful ordinance that we should all follow once we accept Christ as our Savior.  Christ most certainly taught that it is something we should do as an outward manifestation of a changed heart.  However, He did not teach it as a mandate for salvation.  Only one thing is required for salvation… a sincere and humble expression of faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior which leads to being Born Again of The Spirit.

What a beautiful concept this is!  Christ’s sacrifice is a gift we should all receive… it enables all who do so to enter The Kingdom of God.  I will praise my Savior forever for what He has done for me.

Darrell

Aaronic Priesthood, Cults, Mormonism

Deacons in the LDS Church?

36 Comments

Post Author: Darrell

Boys in the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS Church) are ordained to the office of Deacon at the age of 12. This office is the most junior in the Aaronic or lesser Priesthood and is followed by the office of Teacher and the office of Priest. Young men progress through each of these offices as they age and are eventually given the Melchizedek or higher Priesthood and ordained to the office of Elder.

I have always been puzzled at how this LDS practice compares with the teachings of The Bible. Let’s take a look at 1 Timothy 3:8-13.

Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons. In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything. A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well. Those who have served well gain an excellent standing and great assurance in their faith in Christ Jesus.

Paul shares a lot of information in these few short verses: 1) The moral qualities of Deacons – sober, sincere, and trustworthy; 2) The maturity of Deacons – tested, able to understand and keep deep truths of the Christian faith; and 3) The living situation of those who serve as Deacons – husband of one wife, able to manage his children and his household.

Here is the million dollar question: Do any of these standards sound like something a 12-year-old boy can meet? Personally, I do not see how. First, a 12-year-old child is not old enough to have a wife or children, so how can he be the husband of one wife? How can he manage his children or household well? In addition, a 12-year-old boy is not mature enough to understand the deep truths of the Christian faith, so how can he prove he has lived them? He has not lived long enough to be “tested” in anything except maybe a tough Playstation 3 game!

The LDS Church claims to be the restoration of early church of Jesus Christ; however, it is pretty obvious that at least in regards to the office of Deacon, they are way off base. Bottom line – this is just another example of how the teachings and practices of the LDS Church violate those of The Bible.

God Bless!

Darrell

Book of Mormon, Mormonism

Jeffrey R. Holland's General Conference Talk

12 Comments

Post Author: Darrell

In the most recent LDS General Conference, Jeffrey R. Holland gave an impassioned talk regarding The Book Of Mormon.  As defense for the truthfulness of The Book Of Mormon, Holland cites the fact that he has yet to hear of any acceptable explanation for its origin aside from God.  First of all, I vehemently disagree with this position.  There are many reasonable explanations aside from God for the rise of The Book of Mormon.  Nevertheless, I would like to assume for a moment that Holland is right.  What if we could not explain the origin of The Book of Mormon?  Would this prove its truthfulness?  Fortunately, the answer is a resounding “No”.

In order to examine this question, one must understand that Holland’s challenge demonstrates a serious error: the conflating of 1) making an argument that something is true/false with 2) providing an explanation for how it did/did not happen.  When we seek to demonstrate the truthfulness/falseness of something we use arguments to show that it is true or false.  However, these arguments do not need to demonstrate how the subject does/does not work.  For example, I know that the sun provides heat: I walk out in the sunshine everyday, and it warms my body.  People have known this truth about the sun for thousands of years, and this knowledge does not depend upon demonstrating how the sun provides its heat.  I can know that it is true without knowing how it does it.  In fact, the search for how it does this is seeking an explanation for a truth that has already been established.

The same can be said for The Book of Mormon.  While it might be fun to speculate as to exactly how it came about, I do not need to know this in order to know that it is not true or from God.  God has told us several things about Himself in The Bible.  Paramount among these is the fact that He and His Word are eternal and unchanging.  Therefore, we have a sound basis for judging The Book of Mormon to be false, for its teachings and the church(s) which follow it lead people to follow a God and Gospel that contradict the God and Gospel of The Bible.  As a result, if I were to hold the Book of Mormon as true, I would have to discard what God has told me in The Bible. 

For information regarding how the teachings of the Book of Mormon and LDS Church contradict The Bible, you can see my posts here, here, here, and here.  In addition, stick around… there will be more to come.

Book of Mormon, Cults, Mormonism

The Mean Man Who Does (Not?) Bow Down

Leave a comment

Post Author: Darrell

In my last post, I discussed one of the areas where Joseph Smith plagiarized and changed verses from The Bible.  Let’s take a look at another example.  Chapter 12 of 2 Nephi in The Book of Mormon is taken directly from Isaiah chapter 2.  However, there are a few areas where Smith made changes.  Verses 8 & 9 in Isaiah read as follows:

 8 Their land also is full of idols; they worship the work of their own hands, that which their own fingers have made: 9 And the mean man boweth down, and the great man humbleth himself: therefore forgive them not. 

Isaiah is talking about how some men were bowing down to the work of their own hands: idols.  They had turned away from The Lord and had chosen to worship false gods.  Therefore, they were not to be forgiven.  Now, let’s take a look at these two verses in The Book of Mormon.

8 Their land is also full of idols; they worship the work of their own hands, that which their own fingers have made.  9 And the mean man boweth not down, and the great man humbleth himself not, therefore, forgive him not (emphasis mine).

Notice how Smith changed the entire meaning of verse 9 by adding the word not.  Obviously, if one reads verse 9 all by itself, it makes perfect sense to say that a man who does not bow down or humble himself before God should not be forgiven.  However, when read in context with the surrounding verses, adding “not”  in makes this verse utter gibberish, for you are now saying that a man who does not bow down to idols and false gods should not be forgiven by the One True God. 

In his desire to correct the mistakes he thought were in The Bible, Joseph Smith made the classic error of failing to read in context.  He brought his own wisdom to bear on The Word of God, and in the process, the Word of God proved its own worthiness and demonstrated the falseness of his prophetic claims.

Cults, Faith and Works, Mormonism

Run And Not Grow Weary?

3 Comments

 Post Author: Darrell 

Isaiah chapter 40 is among my favorite chapters in The Bible.  A large portion of the chapter is devoted to contrasting the Lord’s greatness with the meekness of man. Verses 6 and 7 say, “All men are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field. The grass withers and the flowers fall, because the breath of the Lord blows on them.”  Verses 22 and 23 liken men to grasshoppers while verses 25 and 26 say of the Lord:  

To whom will you compare me? Or who is my equal? . . .  Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? He who brings out the starry host one by one, and calls them each by name. Because of his great power and mighty strength,  not one of them is missing. He brings princes to naught and reduces the rulers of this world to nothing.

We truly have an incredible God!  He knows and names each and every one of the billions of stars, yet He was willing to condescend Himself in order to lift us up!  The promise at the end of chapter 40 in verses 29 – 31 speaks to the great love the Lord has for us:

He [the Lord] gives strength to the weary and increases the power of the weak. Even youths grow tired and weary, and young men stumble and fall; but those who hope in the Lord will renew their strength. They will soar on wings like eagles; they will run and not grow weary, they will walk and not be faint [emphasis mine].

If we place our hope in Him alone, He will renew us, strengthen us, and lift us up!  There is nothing we can do to receive this promise; rather, it is something that He does in response to our trusting in Him.  What a wonderful promise!

One of the Mormon Church’s four canonized scriptures, The Doctrine and Covenants (D&C), carries this exact promise in Section 89, also known as the Word of Wisdom.  Among other things, the Word of Wisdom commands Mormons not to partake of coffee, tea, or alcohol.  This commandment is considered so important that obedience to it is a requirement for entering the Temple to receive one’s endowment, an ordinance required for admitance to the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom (Mormon Heaven). 

One of the surprising differences between the promise in Isaiah and the promise in D&C 89 is what one must do to receive it.  While The Bible says that all one must do is hope in the Lord, Section 89 says that complete obedience to the Word of Wisdom is required.  Verses 18 – 20 say:   

And all saints who remember to keep and do these sayings [the commandments in the Word of Wisdom], walking in obedience to the commandments . . . shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint [emphasis mine].

Why the difference in requirements?  Did the Lord change His mind and decide that He would require more in order to receive this blessing?  Fortunately, we know the answer to that question is an emphatic “No” as The Lord never changes His mind.  Unfortunately, this is just one more example of how Joseph Smith plagiarized The Bible.  There are numerous places throughout Mormon scriptures where Joseph Smith took portions out of The King James Version of The Bible and made blatant changes.  Stay tuned.  I will cover more of these later.

Faith and Works, Grace, Mormonism

Why Don’t Mormons Have the Peace That Passes All Understanding?

4 Comments

Post Author: Darrell

God has given believers of Jesus Christ the promise of “a peace which passes all understanding” (Phil 4:7). What a wonderful promise! This peace does not come from anything the world can give us. Rather, it comes from having a relationship with Christ, being forgiven, and knowing that our salvation is assured. In fact, our salvation as believers is so certain that God has told us we can approach the throne of grace with confidence (Heb 4:16).

While a member of the Mormon Church, I never experienced this peace.  In fact, during my time as a Mormon I often wondered about my salvation.  I wondered if I had done enough to merit God’s grace and if I would be able to spend eternity with Him in the Celestial Kingdom (Mormon version of what Christians call Heaven).  Coming into a true relationship with Christ opened my eyes, and I now understand what is meant by the “peace that passes all understanding” because I have it!

My experience in Mormonism is not uncommon.  Over the years I have had several LDS friends confide in me and their experiences are very similar.  This is due mainly to the works based salvation that the LDS Church teaches. Mormonism teaches Christ’s atonement opened the doors for salvation to us; however, we have to earn the right to receive this salvation by our works… faith in Christ is not enough. In a 2001 Ensign article, James E. Faust, then counselor in the First Presidency of the Mormon Church, had this to say:

Many people think they need only confess that Jesus is the Christ and then they are saved by grace alone. We cannot be saved by grace alone, “for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.” . . . All of us have sinned and need to repent to fully pay our part of the debt. When we sincerely repent, the Savior’s magnificent Atonement pays the rest of that debt.  [Emphasis Mine]

It is only after we do all that we can do and after we completely repent that Christ’s sacrifice comes in to help us.  Since true, sincere, and complete repentance in required, what must one do to repent? LDS.org has this to say about repentance:

Although confession is an essential element of repentance, it is not enough. The Lord has said, “By this ye may know if a man repenteth of his sins—behold, he will confess them and forsake them” (D&C 58:43). We must maintain an unyielding, permanent resolve that we will never repeat the transgression. . . . Full obedience brings the complete power of the gospel into our lives .

Until one completely forsakes a sin, they have not repented. I don’t know about everyone else, but I can think of several sins that, try as I might, I can honestly say I still struggle with.  Sure, I may be able to point to the big sins (adultery, fornication, murder) and say I am okay. But what about the standard Christ set?  He said if we get angry with someone unjustifiably that we have committed murder in our hearts.  By this standard I think we can all say we are murderers.  Christ also said that if we look upon someone to lust after them that we have committed adultery in our heart. Sounds like we are all adulterers!

Have you completely forsaken the sin of unjustified anger? Can you honestly say you won’t ever look upon someone of the opposite sex again? If not, then according to the Mormon Church, you have not sincerely repented and your sins are not forgiven. In fact, according to D&C 82:7, if you recommitt a sin you have supposedly repented of, all the times you have committed it return and you will be judged for each of them.  Does this sound like a gospel that provides a “peace that passes all understanding?”

All praise be to my great God and Savior Jesus Christ! For He, and He alone, has atoned for our sins.  Praise Him that we can know with confidence we have been forgiven!

Difficult Bible Passages

Can a Person Be Saved After He Dies?

6 Comments

Post Author: Bill Pratt 

There are two difficult passages in 1 Peter  (3:19 and 4:6) that seem to indicate that this may be possible.  I have read a number of interpretations of these verses, but there seems to be no consensus.  However, almost every commentator I read agrees that these verses are not teaching that salvation after death is possible.  Below are some extended quotations from Norman Geisler and Tom Howe’s text on Bible difficulties:

With regard to 1 Pet. 3:19,

The Bible is clear that there is no second chance after death (cf. Heb. 9:27). The Book of Revelation records the Great White Throne Judgment in which those who are not found in the book of life are sent to the lake of fire (Rev. 20:11–15). Luke informs us that, once a person dies, he goes either to heaven (Abraham’s bosom) or to hell and that there is a great gulf fixed “so that those who want to pass” from one to the other cannot (Luke 16:26). The whole urgency of responding to God in this life before we die gives further support to the fact that there is no hope beyond the grave (cf. John 3:36; 5:24).

There are other ways to understand this passage, without involving a second-chance at salvation after death. Some claim that it is not clear that the phrase “spirits in prison” even refers to human beings, arguing that nowhere else is such a phrase used of human beings in hell. They claim these spirits are fallen angels, since the “Sons of God” (fallen angels, see Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7) were “disobedient … in the days of Noah” (1 Peter 3:20; cf. Gen. 6:1–4). Peter may be referring to this in 2 Peter 2:4, where he mentions the angels sinning immediately before he refers to the Flood (v. 5). In response, it is argued that angels cannot marry (Matt. 22:30), and they certainly could not intermarry with human beings, since angels, being spirits, have no reproductive organs.

Another interpretation is that this refers to Christ’s announcement to departed spirits of the triumph of His resurrection, declaring to them the victory He had achieved by His death and resurrection, as pointed out in the previous verse (see 1 Peter 3:18). Some suggest that Jesus offered no hope of salvation to these “spirits in prison.” They point to the fact that the text does not say Christ evangelized them, but simply that He proclaimed the victory of His resurrection to them. They insist that there is nothing stated in this passage about preaching the Gospel to people in hell. In response to this view, others note that in the very next chapter Peter, apparently extending this subject, does say “the Gospel was preached also to those who are dead” (see comments on 1 Peter 4:6). This view fits the context here, is in accord with the teaching of other verses (cf. Eph. 4:8; Col. 2:15), and avoids the major problems of the other view.

With regard to 1 Pet. 4:6,

It should be noted, first, that there is no hope held out anywhere in Scripture for salvation after death. Death is final, and there are only two destinies—heaven and hell, between which there is a great gulf that no one can pass over (see comments on 1 Peter 3:19). So, whatever preaching to the “dead” may mean, it does not imply that one can be saved after he dies.

Second, this is an unclear passage, subject to many interpretations, and no doctrine should be based on an ambiguous passage like this. The difficult texts should be interpreted in the light of the clear ones and not the reverse.

Third, there are other possible interpretations of this passage that do not conflict with the teaching of the rest of Scripture. (1) For example, it is possible that it refers to those who are now dead who heard the Gospel while they were alive. In favor of this is cited the fact that the Gospel “was preached” (in the past) to those who “are dead” (now, in the present). (2) Or, some believe this might not be a reference to human beings, but to the “spirits in prison” (angels) of 1 Peter 3:19 (cf. 2 Peter 2:4 and Gen. 6:2). (3) Still others claim that, although the dead suffer the destruction of their flesh (1 Peter 4:6), yet they still live with God by virtue of what Christ did through the Gospel (namely, His death and resurrection). This victorious message was announced by Christ Himself to the spirit world after His resurrection (cf. 1 Peter 3:18).

I would echo what Geisler and Howe say.  Difficult texts should be interpreted in light of plain texts.  As modern interpreters, we have lost the precise meaning of these two verses, so they are quite difficult to nail down.  Having said that, it would be a huge mistake to hold out hope for a second chance after death, based on these two verses.

Jesus Christ, Mormonism

Do Mormons Worship The Same Jesus As Christians?

47 Comments

I recently entered into a conversation on Jessica’s blog regarding whether Mormons worship the same Jesus as Christians.   I was surprised to discover a few Evangelicals who expressed the belief they do.  Being a former Mormon I must say I wholeheartedly disagree.  To those Christians who hold this position, I would like to give you something to consider…  The First Vision.  Let me explain.

Joseph Smith claimed Jesus Christ and Heavenly Father appeared to him in 1820 and ushered in the restoration of the true church of Jesus Christ – now known as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.  When considering this First Vision claim there are only two positions one can take.

  1. It happened
  2. It did not happen

If one believes the First Vision did in fact happen (Number 1)  there are only two possibilities to consider.

A.  One of the beings who appeared to Joseph Smith was in fact Jesus Christ

B.  Neither of the beings who appeared to Joseph Smith were Jesus Christ

Think about the implications of these two positions for a second.  If “A” is true and Jesus Christ did appear to Joseph then The Mormon Church is what it claims to be… the true Church of Jesus Christ.  For it was started by Jesus Christ Himself calling Joseph Smith as His prophet during the First Vision encounter.  To those of you who believe Mormons worship the same Jesus as us – are you prepared to accept this and join the Mormon Church?  However, if “B” is true, then who was the being who appeared to Joseph Smith if it was not Jesus Christ?  Think about this for a second… this is the being who started The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.  This is the being who appeared to Joseph Smith and called him as his prophet.  This is the being Mormons worship.  If it was not Jesus Christ, who was it?  One thing we can say for sure… if it was not Jesus Christ then we can rest assured Mormons do not worship the same Jesus Christ we worship.

To those who hold the belief the First Vision did not happen (number 2 above) there are still problems to consider when holding the belief Mormons worship the same Jesus as Christians.  For then you have to believe the founder of Mormonism, Joseph Smith, perpetuated a lie of an indescribable magnitude and in the process used this lie to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ.  In other words, Joseph Smith knowingly made up all of the visions and used these false visions to preach and lead others to the REAL Jesus Christ.  In addition, you must believe that he knowingly deceived others into believing THEY EXPERIENCED VISIONS.  For some of his visions were experienced in the presence of and by others.  All of this deceit while still preaching the REAL Jesus Christ.  While one can hold this position, to me it strains credulity.

Personally, I believe the evidence points to the fact Joseph Smith did have a first vision (number 1 above) but the being in this vision was not Jesus Christ (B above).  I believe Joseph’s well documented involvement in the occult opened some undesirable doors and the being who appeared to him was an evil spirit sent to lead the hearts of men astray (1 John 4:1).  IMO, the Jesus of Mormonism is not the Jesus Christ of The Bible.  My prayer is for all Mormons to let go of the legalistic bonds of false religion and turn to the True Jesus Christ of The Bible.  In Him there is safety, in Him there is peace!

God Bless!

Darrell