Anonymous asked: Hello, I admire your strong beliefs and I am happy to see another person serving God and sharing his love. However, I just want to clarify a couple things about your views on Mormonism. I am a Mormon and I just want to let you know a few of your "facts" are not true at all.
1. Mormons are not polytheistic. Polytheism is the belief in multiple gods. Mormons believe there is only one God (the very same God you believe in). And that Jesus Christ is his son who has the same authority and power as God. We believe everyone on earth can become like him as well, but, they don't become God. We become LIKE God.
2. We do not claim God was once a man who became God. We also believe God is a spirit and that he is eternal. However, maybe you are confusing this with how we believe that God does have a body, much like we do, however it is "perfected".
3. Mormons are Christians. A Christian is someone who believes that Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior. We believe this. Therefore, we are Christian.
4. Yes we believe the Bible to be the word of God so far as it is translated correctly, however, this is true for Christians as well. If you read a version of the Bible that had been entirely changed through the mistakes of Man as they attempted to translate it, would you still claim it to be the word of God? No. All we are saying is that there are many versions of the Bible out there, and they do not all say the same thing, therefore how can each and every version be the exact word of God? God would not contradict himself.
5. "Mormonism" is not what we actually call our belief system or our church. That is a slang term that other have given us that we have just started to go along with so people know what we mean when we say, "I am a Mormon." Because not many people know what LDS even means. We are officially, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints". This title also shows our belief in Christ which many people do not even know we have.
Thanks for reading, I am not trying to attack or offend in any way, nor do I want you to think I am offended. I am just trying to clear a couple things up. Thanks! :) God bless.
First off, thank you for a coherent reply. Too often people gloss over what I’ve actually said, and I appreciate you taking the time to read and respond appropriately. I am not offended at all, nor do I feel attacked. I hope we can have a continuing dialogue that further informs everyone who reads or participates! I am glad that you understood my intent, and did not take offense, and I apologize for anything that I may say or may have said that was not as polished as it might have been.
I’m going to respond to your point 5 first, as it will set a few things straight. You are correct that Mormonism is technically not the name of the LDS faith. The LDS faith is, however, a subset of Mormonism. Essentially, Mormonism encompasses all of the followers of Joseph Smith. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (hereafter the LDS or Latter-Day Saints) is a sect of Mormonism—one which I assume you belong to. For more information on the sectarian nature of Mormonism, read this post.
One last general statement before the point-by-point response: You may very well hold the beliefs you list. However, they are not canonical LDS theology, and I intend to prove that.
Point 1: Is the LDS faith polytheistic? The overwhelming answer is yes, Latter-Day Saints are polytheistic. Let’s take a look at some brief definitions, as supplied by Merriam-Webster.
Monotheism:
the doctrine or belief that there is but one God.
Polytheism:
belief in or worship of more than one god.
So everyone is on the same page, right? Mono is one, poly is many. One God vs. many gods. So what does LDS theology teach? We can learn from both the words of Joseph Smith, and the writings of the LDS canon, that there are, in their theology, a plurality of gods.
“I wish to declare I have always an in all congregations when I have preached on the subject of Deity, it has been the plurality of Gods.”
“In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the Gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people it.”
— Joseph Smith Jr., History of the Church, Vol. 6. pg. 306-308.
“And then the Lord said: Let us go down. And they went down at the beginning, and they, that is the Gods, organized and formed the heavens and the earth.”
— Book of Abraham 4:1. The entire chapter is riddled with statements about “the Gods.”
All emphasis is my own.
As you can see, these are not my words, but the words of the LDS founder and prophet Joseph Smith, and the alleged words of God—or, should I say, “the gods.” The faith of the Latter-Day Saints is indeed polytheistic.
You state that “Christ is [God’s] son[,] who has the same authority and power as God.” Could you please clarify? Official LDS theology says that God and Christ are separate beings. God is a God, Christ is a God, and the Holy Spirit is a God. They are “physically distinct from each other,” according to James Talmage in the Articles of Faith (pg. 38).
I’ve made the point before that Mormonism is terrifyingly similar to the teaching of the snake in the Garden, but your phrasing of becoming “LIKE God” is identical. In Genesis 3:5, the snake makes the same claim to Eve, saying that if she eats the fruit, she will “be like God.” First, let me say that it’s just word-play to differentiate between the two. To be like God is to be God. Second, let me point out that Doctrines and Covenants clearly says you will be gods, not like gods:
“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.”
— D&C 132:20, emphasis mine.
It’s quite clear from this passage alone that Godhood is something that the Latter-Day Saint is exalted to. What did Smith have to say about this?
Mortality is the testing or proving ground for exaltation to find out who among the children of God are worthy to become Gods themselves, and the Lord has informed us that “few there be that find it.”
— Joseph Smith Jr., Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1, pg. 69-70.
Smith clearly taught that the faithful Saint will become a god, in the same sense that God became god.
Point 2: According to LDS theology, was God once a man? You deny that this is true, but your Church teaches otherwise. Lorenzo Snow, who occupied the fifth Presidency, taught that “[a]s man now is, God once was; as God is now man may be.” This quote is taken from the Church’s official website, and can be found here. Some Latter-Day Saints may say that was simply an opinion held by Snow, and one that is not valid, but then they must explain the teachings of Joseph Smith:
God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret…I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see.
—Joseph Smith Jr., History of the Church, Vol. 6, Ch. 14, pg. 305-6. Emphasis mine.
Now, this directly contradicts the clear teaching of the Bible. Psalm 90:2 says “even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.” To paraphrase Walter Martin, something that has to become God is not God. God, by definition and by revelation, is eternal. Smith goes on to detail how God dwelt on “an earth,” the same as we do now (ibid). Additionally, Smith taught that God had a father.
“Our father in heaven, according to the Prophet, had a father, and since there has been a condition of this kind through all eternity, each Father had a Father.”
— Doctrines of Salvation, 2:47. Emphasis mine.
Now this leads to a logical problem. If each Father had a Father, there is an infinite number of Father’s Fathers. Now, this raises a few issues. First, we could never reach the god that Latter-Day Saints worship today, as to do so we would have to traverse an infinite number of gods previous to him, which is impossible. Second, because an infinite number of gods would have no beginning, we could never begin to move along the line of gods to this one.
For the sake of brevity, I’m going to stop here, but for more information check out this video of William Lane Craig explaining why actual infinities cannot exist in the real world. He’s discussing the beginning of the universe, but if you simply substitute the word “god” for universe, it applies in exactly the same manner. If there are further questions regarding this point, I will be happy to answer them in another post, but I’d like to move on.
You say that God has a body like a man, but that it is perfected. This denies the clear words of Christ, who said “God is a spirit, and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth” (John 4:24). Also, the language you use implies that the body that god has was once imperfect, as something cannot be perfected if it is always perfect. I’ll assume this disparity is simply a less than appropriate word to express your belief.
Point 3: Are Mormons Christians? I will be less stringent with this answer, as I feel it to be nothing less than a matter of semantics, but I disagree with you for several reasons. The greatest, and only reason I will cover in this post, is that Mormons—speaking of the whole—do not follow the clear teachings of Christ, and therefore do not confess Christ as Lord, though they may believe He is their Savior. Christ said if we love Him, we would obey His commandments (John 14:15). Mormonism teaches things that are contrary to Christ’s words. Therefore, Mormonism is not Christianity.
Point 4: Belief in the Bible. You say that you only believe the Bible so far as it is accurately translated, and I agree that Christianity holds the same ideals. However accurate translation can be immediately verified by comparing the translation to the original Greek. In contrast, the Latter-Day Saints appeal to added revelation from God, not to checking the actual historical texts. As an aside, the text that we have of the Bible can be shown to be %99.5 accurate, and the discrepancies do not affect any major doctrinal statements.
You appeal to the various translations of Scripture, and claim they are substantially different. This is both a misunderstanding, and irrelevant. It’s a misunderstanding because it assumes that the different translations are making mutually exclusive statements. They do not. Any word-for-word translation of the Bible will say basically the same thing. It may use a slightly different word than another word-for-word translation, but that does not necessarily reduce it’s accuracy. Using a synonym would not change the meaning of the passage. Essentially, you’ve equivocated “different” and “wrong,” which is fallacious.
Your point is irrelevant, because it does nothing to force me to accept the need for added revelation from God. Even if some translations of the Bible are wrong, that does not mean they are all wrong. We can do research and find which translations are correct and in accord with the Greek manuscripts, and which are not, leaving us with the most accurate translation of the Word of God.
You say God would not contradict Himself. I agree with that sentence entirely. God would never reveal to us something that is contradictory to something that He previously revealed. The Bible has not been revealed in multiple locations, however, but our faith “was once delivered for all the saints” (Jude 1:3). However, the Book of Mormon, Doctrines and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price, as well as the teachings of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Lorenzo Snow, James Talmage, and many other LDS leaders, all contradict the Bible. Therefore, Mormonism is not Christianity, nor is it of God.
I set out, at the beginning of this post, to show you that, while you may very well hold the beliefs you listed, they are not canonical LDS theology. I feel that I have done this conclusively. I hope you are ready and willing to examine your faith. We know from Scripture that if your faith is not in Christ, it will not save you. Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, spoke to the Sanhedrin and said “there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). I hold that to be true. I hope and pray that you will give your faith an honest evaluation, and see that the Latter-Day Saints have taught you improper things about the Bible, and, most importantly, about Christ.
If you have any further questions about Mormonism, Christianity, Christ, or what it means to be a Christian, please feel free to ask! I am willing, and indeed quite eager, to help you in your search for the true Christ. And that goes for anyone who has read this: If you have any questions about religion, Christianity or otherwise, ask away! I absolutely love getting interesting questions.
God bless!
![I hate this because of it’s inaccuracies. Let’s examine them, shall we?
Noah was a drunk.
Noah’s drunkenness arose later in his life, after God had used him. In fact, the Genesis account describes Noah as a righteous man, “blameless in his generation[, who] walked with God” (Gen. 6:11, ESV). It wasn’t until after the flood had abated that Noah planted a vineyard and became drunk (Gen. 9.) I’m not saying God won’t use drunks: I’m saying that this poster took Scripture out of context.
Abraham was too old.
Yes, Abraham was too old to have children, but that’s all that the context of Genesis 17 implies (v. 17). To simply state that Abraham was too old is to miss the point of the passage.
Isaac was a daydreamer.
First of all, daydreaming is by no means a bad thing. Why is it bad to sit and think about the past, present, or future? From the past, we learn wisdom. In the present, we reflect on our lives. In the future, we have a chance to apply wisdom, as well as to discern the will of God. Nothing about daydreaming is necessarily a bad trait.
My second problem with this statement, is where does scripture say that? I’ve just read Genesis 22-25, which deal with the life of Isaac, and the only possible place that I can see this idea being drawn from is Genesis 24:63, which states that Isaac went out in the field to meditate (לָשׂ֥וּחַ). Granted, Strongs Concordance states that the word “suach” is of uncertain origin, and probably means “to muse pensively,” but there is nothing that implies any sort of immoral or improper action on Isaac’s part (7742). Also, this was not something that Isaac is reported as consistently taking part in. In Genesis 23, Isaac’s mother Sarah dies and is buried. In context, Genesis 24 is talking about the marriage of Isaac, and how his wife Rebekah then comforted him after his mother’s death. Therefore, in context, the verse is speaking of a specific instance in which Isaac went out and was musing, most likely in reflection about his mother and her life.
Leah was ugly.
No, Leah had weak, tender, soft, or delicate eyes, depending on which translation of the word you favor (Gen. 29:17, Strongs 7390). Her vision was bad, which was not a desirable trait—how can a woman keep a house she can’t see?
Samson had long hair and was a womanizer.
The second part is true enough but the first part makes no sense. Of course Samson had long hair. He was a “Nazarite to God from the womb” (Jud. 13:5). Therefore Samson’s hair was to be kept long, as part of the vow to God. No razor was to be used on his head (ibid). It’s illogical to state that something which God specifically commanded Samson to do might be something that would keep God from using Samson. In fact, it is when Samson’s hair is cut that he loses his supernatural strength, and Scripture makes a point of specifying that Samson’s hair began to grow again (Jud. 16:22).
Elijah was suicidal.
No. Absolutely not. Suicidal people try to take their own lives. Elijah was fed up with unfaithful Israel, and he asked that the Lord take him because he had not been any more able to change their hearts than his fathers had—despite the miracles that God performed through him (1 Kings 19:4). This was an utter despair at the lack of repentance of the people of Israel. Elijah was so fed up with their hearts of stone that he would rather have died then continue to be belittled for his fervor and zeal for the Lord.
Isaiah preached naked.
Like the example of Samson, we see here a blatant lack of understanding of Scripture. Isaiah did not preach naked out of his own will, but at the command of Almighty God. “At that time the LORD spoke by Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying, “Go, and loose the sackcloth from your waist and take off your sandals from your feet,” and he did so, walking naked and barefoot” (Isa. 20:2). In the following verses, God describes how this nakedness is a portent of the judgement that would come to pass on Egypt and Cush.
Job went bankrupt.
Whoever put this poster together must have gone to the Rob Bell school of exegesis and Biblical studies. In the book of Job, God allows Satan to attack Job, thereby demonstrating the righteousness of Job’s heart (Job 1). Job only went bankrupt because God allowed it. God knew that Job’s zeal for God was not rooted in his belongings, or even in his family. That is why God allowed Job to fall from his place of high estate. And at the end of Job? ”And the LORD restored the fortunes of Job, when he had prayed for his friends. And the LORD gave Job twice as much as he had before” (Job 42:10). Job was blessed more in the end of his life than at the beginning, because he remained faithful to God (Job 42:12).
Zaccheus [sic] was too small.
Zacchaeus was a small guy, sure, but there is nothing in scripture that said that he was too small for anything other than seeing over the rest of the crowd (Lk. 19:3). Zacchaeus’ is an example of a rich man truly repentant, in contrast with the rich young ruler of the previous chapter (Lk. 18:18-30). When Zacchaeus sees and responds to Jesus, he does so by giving half of everything he owns to the poor, and repaying anyone he cheated by 4 times the amount he took from them (Lk. 19:8).
Paul was too religious.
This may be a small side rant, but why has the term “religious” become derogatory in nature? Who gets to decide when someone is too religious, and what standard are they using to make that judgement?
Rather than write an entire rebuttal, I’ll leave this last one as homework. Take some time and read up on the life of Paul as revealed in Scripture. Start with Acts 9 and Philippians 3.
Biblical literacy: It really is important.
Have nothing to do with irreverent, silly myths. Rather train yourself for godliness.
1 Timothy 4:7](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_llmu8ga8rb1qea826o1_500.jpg)
