Any reason to fear?

The Mormon Coffee post of April 18, 2008 discussed Jesus’ words from Matthew 7:21-23. Here Jesus warns of the result of spiritual self-deception:

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart form me, you workers of lawlessness’” (Matt. 7:21-23).

The article referred to Jesus’ warning as “the most frightening words,” for they speak of being eternally cast away from the safe and comforting presence of the Lord.

After reading the article on Mormon Coffee about the Matthew passage, a Latter-day Saint commented,

“Frightening words? I’ve read this passage many times, and have never found it frightening. The Savior’s ministry has always brought me peace.”

This made me wonder. Under what circumstances would the threat of eternal separation from the Savior Jesus Christ not be frightening?

For someone who does not believe in Christ I suppose the words would have little meaning; but clearly our LDS friend is not in that category.

Someone believing he is secure in his salvation may not be frightened by these words, but he would be foolish to dismiss them so readily. After all, Jesus is warning of self –deception — He is speaking specifically about people who (mistakenly) believe they are secure in their salvation.

Be that as it may, it’s unlikely that our LDS friend is in that category, either. In Mormonism there is no ultimate assurance of spending eternity in the celestial kingdom where Christ dwells, for one of the requirements to enter that kingdom is faithful endurance to the end.

If a person does not believe in a hellish eternal punishment Jesus’ words might not be frightening. In the Mormon belief system pretty much everybody gets an eternal life far better than the earth life we are familiar with. So the prospect of gaining any one of the three LDS eternal kingdoms would probably not generate fearful concern.

Nevertheless, the Mormon understands that being assigned to a place outside the celestial kingdom is in turn being banished from living eternally in the presence of Christ. Is this not frightening to contemplate?

A Christian reader of Mormon Coffee responding to our fearless LDS friend suggested a possible answer:

“Jesus words are sobering to those of us who follow Him because we know what the stakes are.”

Could that be it? People who are not frightened or sobered by Matthew 7:21-23 don’t know what they have to lose? That makes sense to me. If we don’t know Jesus, if we don’t know the depth and the height of who and what He is, maybe we aren’t too worried about living without Him.

Several Mormons have told me over the years that heaven would not be heaven without the continuation of their marriage and family unit; if all they got was dwelling forever in the presence of God they were not really interested in going there.

An LDS man once asked me what I wanted eternity to be like. I told Him that my hope and my joy are in Christ. I long to spend eternity in His presence. That is my perfect eternity, to be with my Savior forever.

The man told me that I would probably get what I hoped for, but I would be missing the best part. He said,

“It’s like going to an exquisite restaurant, ordering an incredible dinner, and leaving after the soup and salad, before the entrée arrives.”

For him, Jesus is a nice appetizer preceding a fulfilling eternity that goes way beyond the joy of the Lord.

Listen to the way Christian pastor S.M. Lockridge described his King Jesus:

Is He your King? Do you know Him?

He is what we have to lose if we deceive ourselves into believing a lie.

Terrifyingly frightening thought.

About Sharon Lindbloom

Sharon surrendered her life to the Lord Jesus Christ in 1979. Deeply passionate about Truth, Sharon loves serving as a full-time volunteer research associate with Mormonism Research Ministry. Sharon and her husband live in Minnesota.
This entry was posted in Jesus Christ, Salvation. Bookmark the permalink.

57 Responses to Any reason to fear?

  1. falcon says:

    Oh boy, I just about jumped up and shouted “preach it brother”. Growing up as a kid and going to mass everyday said in Latin, I never got any of this type of preaching. Just followed along in my little English translation prayer book. My problem is, living here in the midwest we don’t have an abundance of Black Pentecostal Holiness Churches.
    Now this guy (preacher) knows Jesus. And it’s based on God’s Holy Word, the Bible. The Mormon concept of heaven etc. doesn’t come from the Bible. It comes from one of their extra Biblical sources that provides no test for truth. Mormons like to brag that their conceptualization of eternal life is based on revelation. This Mormon revelation is supported by feelings that are interpreted as being supernatural in nature. What a recipe for disaster. How many souls have been led down a path of distruction because they believed a false prophet and misinterpreted “supernatural” feelings as Gos’s confirmation of the truth. Being with Christ for eternity is no big turn-on for Mormons because they don’t know Jesus. He’s just a subgod with his own planetary system and goddess wife(s). They hope for the same so Jesus is just their up-line in the endless multimarketing scheme known as Mormonism. Can this “restored gospel” save? No! It can only deceive.

  2. Michael P says:

    This verse is a scary one. Though I am confident of my place in heaven, the possibility of being in error is apparent here: an eternity in hell.

    I need to always be sure my motives are pure and my heart is with God, most importantly, my heart is with God.

    I have had an exchange with a few regarding this exact topic in “As Does the Bible”, and hope those I engaged with seriously consider the ramifications of Jesus’ words.

    I’d also like to note the Mormon you quoted really doesn’t address the quote in his response. He only says Christ’s ministry has given him peace. I wonder if he has considered all of Christ’s message, and not just those he likes…

    The Lockridge sermon– I have seen that before at my church. It is very powerful, and I am happy to have seen it again. Christ is so much more than just a man become a god… I hope our Mormon friends see that, too.

  3. lillym says:

    “They hope for the same so Jesus is just their up-line in the endless multimarketing scheme known as Mormonism.”

    I was wondering if Mormon beliefs have anything to do with the fact that Multi-level marketing schemes are most prevalent in Utah. ? I think Utah has the highest number of MLM companies in the world. And I’ve often wondered why – if Mormonism has something to with it.

    It is comforting at least, that we can easily see how false prophets work. They ALWAYS subjugate Jesus in some way – always. You can set your watch by it. He’s either put in some sort of inferior position, or ignored, or classified as something other than the perfect all-powerful God He is.

  4. falcon says:

    In order to appeal to the ready made market niche of vulnerable religious consumers, false prophets predictably attack the Bible (in some way), the person of Jesus Christ, and the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith a part from any works that an individual can do to earn their own (salvation). When it comes to the Bible, they either degrade it, saying it is less than God breathed, or they have a new interpretation of what it means, or they have a supplemental writing/scripture which soon takes precedant over or replaces the Bible. When it comes to Jesus, He becomes less than the God-Man of the scriptures. Can it be any more degrading to Jesus than to say, as the Mormons do, that He and Lucifer are brothers? The Jehovah Witnesses have gone as far as having their own “translation” of the Bible that restructures the famous verse in the Bible to read “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was a god.” The Mormons have all kinds of written and spoken revelation that follow the predictable path of attempting to corrupt the Gospel. Finally, the pathway to salvation includes a works formula. In doing this, the prophet and his successors can keep the faithful in a constant state of tension regarding the status of their souls. The faithful can than be manipulated and controled at the will of the prophet. Joseph Smith used this “technique” to gain compliance over the women he seduced. Today Mormonism, and it’s FLDS brothers, use the threat of eternal damnation to keep people from leaving the group. I’ve heard FLDS women, who have found their way out of the cult, to comment that they left because hell couldn’t be any worse than what they were presently experiencing.
    The predictable path of deceit of course takes people away from Jesus, the qualified Savior, the One who provides the pathway to eternal life. It’s been going on for 2,000 years and will continue until our Lord returns.

  5. subgenius says:

    i enjoy that you quoted the Saint’s comments, because all of us, regardless of “Faith” believe the same. I think that all of us have a reason to fear. The fear i speak of us is from motive. Do we all just go through the motions of the Gospel or do we actually follow His word with our hearts and spirits? Many of us have confidence in our “place” within Our Heavenly Father’s plan on this earth but that leaves me to wonder one point. When we find ourselves in a position where we seek assistance through prayer. Not the prayer for others or for “situations”, but rather that which is for inner strength. These weak moments when we need His strentgh. These are the times that speak to our motives and these motives are what distinguish those who are being spoken of in the opening Matthew 7:21-23. For instance, who of us respond to this topic with only the intent to degrade others, and who is interested in the opportunity to ‘reach-out’ in the spirit of Christ. That is to say, am i a person intersted in responding to this post with a positive message of what i believe can help others by either enlightenment or by the honest discourse of debate…..or am i not.

    Personally, John 10:16 has a powerful message for all of us who comment on this board.

    In closing, i believe that the years before the “2nd coming” are more “fear” than anything else.

  6. Rick B says:

    Sub, We do not all believe the same. LDS has a different gospel and many LDS even admit that, they might believe theirs is correct and ours wrong, but it is a different gospel. Even the BoM teaches their is only one true church.

    Then Sub, you said

    am i a person intersted in responding to this post with a positive message of what i believe can help others by either enlightenment or by the honest discourse of debate…..or am i not.

    It is not simpley about a postive message, Jesus spoke the truth, yet that true was not always postive, same with Paul, Jesus spoke of the Rich man in hell, Paul spoke of People going to hell for teaching a different Gospel, Jude spoke of people being put in the blackness and darkness for ever. It is truth, yet it is not Postive warm fuzzy feelings. Maybe these guys have a spirit of contention and Jesus was not being Christ like. Rick b

  7. eric017 says:

    Here is my take as a former Mormon. I don’t think that many Mormons view Matthew 7:21-23 as reason that they need to fear. Why? Because if one starts with the premise that the Mormon gospel is true, then the question of who exactly Jesus is referring to is turned around. Mormons, I think view all those who call on the name of Christ who aren’t LDS as the ones who Jesus is referring too here. So instead of the individual being concerned that one’s personal relationship with Christ is not scriptorially sound or proper (which is how I think a Christian would view this passage), the LDS would feel comforted by Jesus’s words because they ‘know’ they are in the correct system (i.e. the prophet can’t lead them astray).

    In other words, they don’t see this passage as a reason to make sure that thier own relationship with Christ is sound and proper (which is how it is meant to be interpreted, I think), rather they view Jesus’s words as condemnation of the rest of us who call ourselves Christian who aren’t Mormon.

    Again, I’m not at all defending this position, rather I am commenting on how I personally have seen how Mormons approach such passages.

  8. falcon says:

    I echo Rick’s comments regarding “we all believe the same.” If we all believed the same Mormons wouldn’t be out pounding the pavement looking for recruits. There are written side-by-side comparisons of LDS doctrine and that of orthodox Christianity. The doctrines are not even distance cousins of each other. We can start with the nature of God, the person and work of Jesus Christ and salvation by grace through faith and see that we are talking about two completly different religions.
    Rick is also spot-on regarding the “degrade others” comments. My experience has been that any vigorous defense of the Gospel by pointing out, with evidence, the false nature of Mormonism is seen by Mormons as an attack, either corporate or personal. This charge is usually made when there is nothing of substance to offer.

  9. subgenius says:

    Good comments regarding mine, however perhaps i should clarify a few notions. First when i wrote “we all believe the same” i notice two different responses to “what” was the same, each filling in a blank per their own summation. My intention was that we all believe in Jesus as the cornerstone of our Church and Faith, and His lessons are invaluable.
    Now when it comes to the “personal attacks” issue, i could not disagree more. The ‘Christian’ comments on this thread are typical full of rhetoric and uninformed assumptions that seldom merit response. They are often nothing more than inflammatory and often structured around the same which they criticize…One comment claims to be 0 sure of his “doctrine”, i expected to read “i know my church is true” from this non-mormon, rather this anti-mormon. Which also has me asking, who is commenting on here that does NOT believe their church to be the one and only true church? Anyone have doubts?
    i enjoyed eric017 point about the message behind the above quoted Matt. 7:21-23, however i disagree with his blanket accusation that “they” interpret that verse they way he states. That is an unfounded statement, surely some people within all Faiths misinterpret that quote; it is not unique to the Mormon experience.
    Any vigorous claims brought against the Mormon Faith is welcomed by this Saint, however i have yet to see one yet.

  10. falcon says:

    I see you’re taking the approach of evaluating the posters here rather than discussing the issues at hand. The posters here are not “uninformed”. My guess is that most of the regular Christian posters here, for example, know more about the real history of Mormonism than Mormoms themselves. There is a steady stream of “vigorous claims” regarding the Mormon faith presented on this blog so I don’t know where you’re coming from with that comment. In fact the articles that serve as the jumping off point for conversation here directly confront the basic doctrine, practice and history of the LDS church. I really don’t know how you’re failing to connect the dots here. There’s a spiritual blindness apparent and revealed in these charges.
    To the substance of the discussion, we don’t all believe in Jesus, the Jesus of the Bible. The Jesus that Mormons believe in is a product of a mother and father god in a spiritual realm some where out near the star Kolob. He is said, by Mormons, to be the brother of Lucifer, and he was according to Mormon to the prophet B. Young fathered by an actual sexual physical union between God the Father and Mary. Mormonism coops the name of Jesus of the Bible. The view of Mormons regarding Jesus is heretical and blasphmous. There is no salvation for Mormons through this false god and false Jesus.

  11. Michael P says:


    Vigorous claims…

    Wow. What would be vigorous? I mean really. You come out and write your last post without any specifics whatsoever.

    This post will among my most inflammatory, but I assure you, I typically look to avoind confrontation.

    Look, though, if you wish to write a comment like your last, could you offer an alternative view? Defend your view, or take out ours. Do not just say they are unfounded. How are they unfounded? Where do we find they are unfounded? Who says they are unfounded?

    Lok further, religion, on its surface is a subjective thing. It is based on faith. Some of your brethren have argued from this vantage point. It has some merit. But here’s the deal: Christianity is a bold and powerful faith. It makes ultimate claims of truth, and does not make excuses that all faiths have some grains of truth. Rather, it says that there is only one way to see a positive life after death, and there are no do-overs. As you know, this upsets many.

    We base this claim on sources that do not ultimately prove anything, but gosh, they make them hard to deny when you look at what they say about themselves and the world. This is partly why we focus on the historicity of the Bible. It gives credence to the faith. Why would we believe in something that says what happened in the world is just plain wrong? I mean really, why? If it tells tall tales about history, why would it tell the truth about faith?

    Now, I will pause a second here. I do think I have, and many others have to, underplayed the role of faith in our faith. It is about faith. But as rational humans (God gave us rationality, no?) why would we put our faith in something that makes no sense? Yes, faith is primary, but faith is based on something that makes sense.

    Can you say, without reservation, that your faith is based on something that makes sense? Honestly, can you? Are you sure JS was not a con-man? What about the BoM without the evidence?

  12. Michael P says:

    Sorry to continue on my long post, but it needs some more thought…

    I know you say there is some hope that the BoM is true, but there is no one I have found, or anyone here, outside the LDS faith (sourcing FARMS does not count), can give any credence to the BoM. I am sure you are familiar with the Smithsonian’s letter, and if you have any evidence, let us know.

    Someone once said if we found some city then it would prove LDS. Let me say this: as a rational human, if it were found, I would rethink my position.

    If you were to look outside your faith, and see evidence you were wrong, would you rethink your faith? I doubt it, as long as you are run by the burning in your bosom.

    But you know, as I think about Mormonism, and its past, and its future, I expect that one day it will wake up and find it is just another Christian faith. I do not mean this in the way you expect; I mean it that your leaders will eventually, in an effort to be like the rest of us, will get there. They will abandon such thoughts as baptizing the dead, becoming God’s, and all other controversial theologies will be swept under the rug. You will look in the mirror and believe in the Nicene Creed.

    The current LDS want so much to be accepted and viewed as normal. The past 100 years have demonstrated this, and each step they move closer to Biblical Christianity. Banning polygamy, allowing blacks, denying Adam/God, questionning whether or not you become gods, and soon enough you will have to admit Christ looks a lot like we have been saying for some time.

    So again, as LDS try to be normal, I think they will become exactly what they hate: Christian.

    BTW, I am no prophet, and do not wish to speak for anyone but myself. And I hope this is a vigorous claim.

  13. falcon says:

    The orthodox Christian views of who Jesus is, is that Jesus is fully human and fully divine, having two natures in one person without confusion, without change, without division, without separation. In Phillipians 2:5-11 Paul writes that “Christ Jesus….being in very nature God, (was) made in human likeness… and become obedient to death…Every tongue (should) confess Jesus Christ is Lord.” This Jesus is the qualified Savior who by surrendering Himself to death on the cross provides, to all who confess His name, eternal life. Why is it important to get Jesus’ nature right? It is important because we can only be saved by the One who is qualified to save us. An imposter, a counterfit Christ cannot provide the satisfaction for sins. The Arians of history past taught/believed that Jesus was not eternal or perfect like God. They saw Him as God’s agent in creation. This is not a Jesus that can save. The stakes are high in getting this right. The Bible clearly teaches what separation from God is all about. To understand this sobering message and the consequences of rejecting the real Jesus, the Christ who is qualified to provide salvation, is to reject all false claims by false prophets. I would pray that God would break through the barrier of false claims and false teachings that separates people from the gift of eternal life. Being sincere in false faith is no excuse before the judgement seat of Christ. If respect for the Jesus of the Bible isn’t enough motivation to come to Him for salvation, than fear of separation from Him for eternity ought to bring people to Him.

  14. Michael P says:

    Falcon, absolutely.

    I fear that what gets in the way is the issue of pride, primarilly, but also envy and lust.

    Many who believe something akin to Mormonism, which promises godlike exaltation, whether or not they do so intentionally, believe in the hopes of achieving godhood. This is a motivator of pride. They envy others in their faith who achieve much, and they lust after the raising in their temple standing. They then return to pride. The look at me attitude is prevelent, I believe, in th Mormon faith.

    Of course, this will be denied, and I expect no less. Perhaps there are some who sincerely think they are doing it for god, and their achieving exaltation to godhood glorifies god.

    I cannot know they are wrong, for who can know the hearts of men but God. And this is where the verse becomes quite scary, and it should for them, for anyone who calls upon Christ. If our faith is in the wrong place, the wrong god or christ, we are dead.

    But as long as people are motivated by something more than Jesus alone, pride is sure to be hiding beneath the surface. Pride is a tricky thing.

  15. eric017 says:

    I agree entirely that there are others outside the LDS church who could misinterpret Matt. 7:21-23. I also think that there are probably Mormons out there who interpret it correctly. However, I stand by my statement that overall and in general Mormons missinterpret this, while in general Christians do not. Why? Denominationalism. I do not think we are approaching this subject from the same perspective. In my experience, Mormons view Christianity as a bunch of different denominations, which it is but one. Further, I think Mormons view all denominations as differing, and that only one denomination is correct. The logical extention is that everyone (regardless of denomination) should believe that they are in the correct denomination. Thus, everyone interprets Matt 7:21-23 to mean that Jesus is talking about “everyone not in the correct denomination”. Thus, it is logical to say that Mormons would apply Jesus’ words to everyone who isn’t LDS? Is in your view, the church not true?

    Most Christians, in general, DO NOT view Christianity this way! We do not see a bunch of different denominations, with only one being correct. It doesn’t matter what denomination one belongs too!!! What matters is a personal relationship with Jesus that is based on sound Bibilical principles. Membership in the correct denomination does not matter, because for the most part Christians don’t believe there is a correct denomination.

    Last, I totally disagree with your statement suggesting Mormons welcome vigorous criticism of thier faith. For the most part (certainly not all, but most) I have been associated (I am the only non-Mormon in my family) with do not want to even consider anything that isn’t faith promoting.

  16. subgenius says:

    First-my post of May26 was in response to those who commented on my post of May25, thus the topic may have been led astray.
    That we believe Satan is ‘brother’ of Jesus is a typical “unfounded” claim made by pesrons who do not “know more about mormonism than a mormon”. Can we agree that Our Heavenly Father is the creator of the Spirits of Jesus and Satan (and all spirits)? Therefore all of our Spirits are ‘kin’ to Satan because we all have the same Spiritual Father; we actually use “Spirit Brother” to illuminate this context. We proclaim and believe that Jesus is the only physically begotten Son of God – satan was not and never will be begotten – the claim above is”unfounded” and it arises from that misconception, hopefully this has been clarified.
    My Faith (Hebrews 11:6) makes complete “sense” to me, but not the “sense” you use. I spiritually discern the truths of the Bible and BoM, and yet some desire to Physically discern the truths of the Bible. The Bible has stated that this is not useful (ie. 1Cor2:14). The belief that finding a piece of Noah’s ark would “prove” or give “creedence” the Bible to be true is a fallacy; which Bible translation would it prove true?, which books?, the KJV? the apocrypha? the dead sea scrolls? Clearly the “will of God” stated in this thread’s article is not to have science “prove” anything regarding the truth of the Spirit. Science and rationale have their place, the Physical, not Spiritual. i use mapquest for directions within the city not the book of Hebrews.
    Ah, ‘denominations’ are a sign of the lack of a true teaching. The LDS church knows this and teaches accordingly.This is why the existence of ‘FLDS’ as a “denomination” is unacceptable to us, it shows that a corrupted message causes one to “fall” away from the true Church of Jesus Christ – the one Jesus preached and organized himself, without denominations.
    Being “sure” of salvation denies the true doctrine of justification and sanctification.

  17. Berean says:

    Michael P,

    I appreciate your optism regarding the future of the Mormon Church suddenly waking up from spiritual darkness, becoming orthodox and rejecting the teachings and past prophets that have set the Mormon Church at odds with traditional Christianity. Every time I watch the DVD “Called To Be Free” I dream of this happening to the Mormon Church. This DVD is the story of how Herbert Armstrong’s Worldwide Church of God dramatically turned from being a non-Christian cult into a Christian Church with orthodox teachings. It’s an incredible true story.

    However, at this time, they aren’t even close. At the April 2008 LDS Conference, Mormon Apostle Joseph Wirthlin said in reference to those Mormons that have left the Church because of some of its wacky teachings:

    “To those who have strayed because of doctrinal concerns, we cannot apologize for the truth. We cannot deny doctrine given to us by the Lord Himself. On this principle we cannot compromise.”
    (Ensign, May 2008, page 19)


    What separates the Mormon Church from the Christian Church? This for starters:

    “No man in this Church can obtain the highest degree of celestial glory without a worthy woman who is sealed to him. This temple ordinance enables eventual exaltation for both of them…Any discussion of family responsibilities to prepare for exaltation would be incomplete if we included only mother, father, and children. What about grandparents and other ancestors? The Lord has revealed that we cannot become perfect without them; neither can they without us be made perfect. Sealing ordinances are essential to exaltation. A wife needs to be sealed to her husband; children need to be sealed to their parents; and we all need to be connected with our ancestors…In God’s eternal plan, salvation is an individual matter; exaltation is a family matter.” (Mormon Apostle Russell Nelson, Ensign, May 2008, pages 7-10)

  18. falcon says:

    The word “unfounded” means “lacking a sound basis”. Now does the idea that Christians view Mormons as believing Jesus and Lucifer are brothers lack a sound basis as far as Mormon teaching goes? In-other-words, what is the basis for making the claim that Mormons believe this? Well what are we to make of the June 1986 Ensign “I have a question” article by Jess L. Christensen (pp.25-26). I quote: “On first hearing the doctrine that Lucifer and our Lord, Jesus Christ, are brothers may seem surprising to some-especially to those unacquainted with latter-day revelations. But both the scriptures and the prophets affirm that Jesus Christ and Lucifer are indeed offspring of Heavenly Father and, therfore spirit brothers.” So in view of this quote, I don’t think the charge is unfounded.
    I would say that other sects/denomintations of Mormonism have as much claim to the truth of Mormonism as does the Utah branch. Who owns the property in Independence, Mo. on which the Mormon temple is to be built? Who was the prophet of the restored LDS now known as the Community of Christ? Was it not Joseph Smith’s son? In reading their doctrine and that of the Utah branch, there is a definite difference in Mormon theology between the two. Who has the Mormon truth? Being that Joseph Smith’s son was the prophet, I would say that trumps the B. Young led Utah denomination. There are differnt denominations of Mormonism all having a legitimate claim to Mormon truth. I’m sure they all prayed about it and got a burning in their bosom. Therefore, they must all be true even though they don’t agree with each other.
    Spiritual discernment vs. physical discernment? Here we go again. If I thought it, if I prayed about it, and if I got a supernatural feeling, then it’s true regardless of the facts. This is why, Mormonism has so many “unclaimed” revelations from their prophets. Even the most ardent saint has to pass on some of this stuff (see Adam-God teaching by B. Young for example).

  19. Berean says:

    Part 2

    Nowhere in the Bible does it say that one’s salvation or exaltation is dependent on anyone else. First, exaltation (becoming a god) is not taught in scripture. I would cite the many verses but I doubt you would look them up. This modern day revelation is false because it contradicts what God has already said in the Bible. Mormons agree that God did speak in the Bible. It’s the oldest revelation. Newer revelation has to confirm and cannot contradict past revelation. God is not the author of confusion. God cannot lie.

    Mormons are still trying to “become perfect” which means that they are in violation of the commandment of Matthew 5:48 thus they are condemned right now (James 2:10). Christians already have spiritual perfection because Christ has declared us perfect (in our standing before God) right now (Hebrews 10:10-14). Christians don’t need the help of their spouses, kids or grandparents to help them get to the Father. This is false teaching and takes away from the atonement of Christ.

    Subgenius, no we cannot agree that Heavenly Father created the spirit of Jesus and Satan. Jesus is not a created being. Jesus is the creator of all things (Colossians 1:16). Jesus created Satan. Mormons refer to Jesus the same way that the Jehovah’s Witnesses do: “a god” – dead wrong!

    Mormonism teaches that one has to have a physical body to become a god. However, this wasn’t the case with Jesus for some reason:

    “By obedience and devotion to the truth he attained that pinnacle of intelligence which ranked him as A GOD, as the Lord Omnipotent, while yet in the pre-existent state.” (Mormon Doctrine, page 129)

    While there are many Christian denominations out there, most of us agree on the central truths of the Bible that determine one’s salvation. Issues outside of one’s salvation we are allowed to have different opinions (1 Cor 11:18-19). We part when heresy is taught regarding Christ’s deity and the nature of God among other things.

  20. Michael P says:

    Sub, I read your response, and it is interesting. In trying to bridge the gap between us, I think we do use terms very differently. Sense, for instance, is something you highlight. Spiritual sense, in the way you describe it, is based on the burning in your bosom. This may make perfect sense to you, as it certainly seems right and good. But to us, it flies in the face of the reality of God. Feeling good doesn’t get you anything– it is submitting to God, and that is often times very uncomfortable. It goes against so many things we want to be true, but we know based on the spirit talked about in 1 Cor, we know to be wrong. We know the spirit you rely on is wrong because we test the spirit based on scripture and on the test we see given in 1 John 4. We see the Bereans study scripture to test everything, and we see in the epistles Paul referencing groups who study these letters and accept their being from God.

    I know you will disagree, and as I have said, as long as you have the burning, you will disagree. I even said that until you put yourself out there to really test you will not change.

    Also in your response you ask a lot of questions and make some statements that we have addressed. You continue to assume all denominations are different, even though we have explicitly said otherwise. You continue to ask questions that are fallacious. Its not about the Ark or the translation, its about the books telling a true story. Your reference to mapquest is interesting, because archeologists have used the Bible as a mapquest of sorts, because it is that reliable.

    One more thought on denominations. I would say that at a time past, denominations had more division among some. Baptists and Methodists and Presbyterian and Lutheran and Anglican all had people full of pride in them, and this clouded thier unity in Christ. But the division does not necessitate the division you want their to be. Once you drop the pride, there is remarkable agreement.

  21. subgenius says:

    To keep things simple, i will only try to address non-mormon comments with the KJV of the Bible. No apocrypha, no BoM, no Pearl of Great Price, no scholar articles, no Pope quotes, and no clever quips from any pastors or prophets gone by. gone
    Exaltation is taught by the Bible. It is first alluded to by Genesis 3:22. Furthermore how do you interpret Rev 3:21? Who is capable of sitting in the throne of Christ? or Rev 14:1, what does it mean to have the name of God the Father placed upon you? Who is an heir of God in Rom 8:17? What do the Faithful inherit in Hebrews 1:2 – ‘ALL Things’. Matthew 5:48 “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” Now do not be confused, you can never surpass your Father, but you can be a father. we shall be like WHO in 1John 3:2? How will you be able to do “greater works” than he who speaks in John 14:12? and my favorite Psalms 82:1,6 – who are “ye” in this verse, how can God judge among gods, if there are none?. Though we may achieve, through faith and sanctity, an “afterlife” LIKE Our Heavenly Father’s – we are still subject to and worship Him.

    i enjoyed how your quote uses the term “spirit brothers” as i did, if you read my above comment you will see how “brother” used without the context of “spirit” is why the original comment is “unfounded”. Who do you believe created the Spirits of Jesus and Satan?

    do not fool yourself, i am not trying to bridge the gap, that is how denominations get formed. I never claimed that my Spiritual Discernment is based on hippie-like “good” feelings, nor “Sense” nor have i ever used the term “burning-bosom”; i purposely use “spiritually discern”. 1John4 applies to anyone, it does not exclude either of us (there is no ‘test’ there). By definition all denominations are different. Why are you a denomination? If denomination does not matter, then why be one?…mmmmm Pride is the seed of denominations?

  22. Rick B says:

    Your A funny Guy. I have had many MM’s sit on my couch, look me straight in the eye and tell me that they are brothers to both Jesus and Lucifer. So I ask them, your saying Lucifer is your brother? Yep that is what they say.

    Also you really need to stop saying were clueless, Give us evidence to where were wrong or keep quite.

    On my blog I have been accused of lying and not knowing all the facts, so I sovled that real fast, I scan the actual doctument on my blog, loke the Adam God from the JoD for example, once LDS can see and read BY saying Adam is God, they cannot deny it or say, thats not true. Rick b

  23. Michael P says:

    Berean, I agree it is a long way off, and I remain hopeful it will go that way. Each successive revelation seems to bring them closer, and to hear them talk in public, they certainly do not say the things that differentiate us from them. I think eventually, they will get there.

    And subgenious. I am not fooling myself. I don’t think you are trying to bridge the gap. You have no desire to know what it is we really believe and that is fine. You are comfortable in your place, and anything to rock the boat would so radically change your world. However, we do seek to bridge the gap so that we can rock your world with the freedom we have in Christ. But to do so, we must communicate effectively, which is difficult given the wall you have built and the way you use terms.

    You are right about 1 John 4. It is for everyone. But there is indeed a test. It is pretty clear. Perhaps you could explain how it is not a test. For kicks, here is the verse: 1Dear 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. 2This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.

    Add into that the myriad of verses saying we are to review scripture and that scripture is from God, and you will see the picture.

    And finally, reread my commments on pride and demoninations. You missed quite a bit.

  24. subgenius says:

    where am i denying anything you say? Additioanlly, i just gave you the proverbial boat-load of evidence, of which you and others have yet to provide rebuttal. Such as the notion that you need to explain how we are NOT spirit brothers to Jesus and Satan. I provided my discernment, please provide yours. i also provided a littany of Bible references, yet you provide nothing, except, as usual, rhetoric. i will try to peek at your blog and engage you there, perhaps there you can stay on point.
    There is not test. What are the qualifications set forth in 1John4 that i fail? have i denied Jesus, no i have not. is it verse 11? 1John4 has no excusion for Mormons, Baptists, or Catholics. So how is this chapter have any “test”? because you say it does? does your bosom burn with this test?
    as far as denominations, i did read it twice and missed nothing except your response to my questions. why can you not read what is said and respond to simply that? i have earnestly answered many questions and statements with reference and rhetoric, yet you move through the subject like a slippery eel, refusing to come up for air. Again, why are you a denommination?

  25. falcon says:

    Your point was that the Christian claim that LDS believe that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers, is “unfounded”. When the LDS say they are “spirit brothers”, what are we to make of that? Walter Martin called Mormonism a “maze” for several reasons, this would be one of them. LDS say that Jesus and Lucifer are spirit brothers, but they aren’t brothers? This is so Mormon. Mormons don’t believe in a works oriented salvation either, but when you read their position on this and observe their actual religious practice, it’s hard not to see the works formula. Mormons worship Jesus but they don’t worship Him. They worship only God, so they are monotheists unless that means they are polytheists because they do/don’t maybe worship Jesus. Mormons have raised obfuscation to an art form and than blame others for not understanding what they can’t seem to get straight themselves.
    Who do I believe created the spirits of Jesus and Satan. Jesus is not a created spirit. He is God. There is one God, three persons Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Mormons do not believe this and that’s one of the many reasons Mormons are not part of the Christian mainstream. Interistingly enough the Community of Christ Mormon denomination says on its website: “The one eternal, living God is triune: one God in three persons.” So there seems to be some definite disagreement among the Mormon denominations on this point (as well as several others).

  26. Ralph says:

    Falcon said – “The orthodox Christian views of who Jesus is…” I don’t see how you can make a statement like this for all as there are many groups out there that proclaim to be Christian that believe differently to you and they trace their beginnings to Jesus Christ and His apostles. I do agree with what you said later “Why is it important to get Jesus’ nature right? It is important because we can only be saved by the One who is qualified to save us. An imposter, a counterfit Christ cannot provide the satisfaction for sins.”

    So is the ‘orthodox Christian’ view of who Jesus is the correct view? I have said before that in the Harper’s Bible dictionary it states that the Trinity described in the creeds is not found in the Bible. It states that ”The explicit doctrine was thus formulated in the postbiblical period, although the early stages of its development can be seen in the NT.” Here it states that there was a development occurring starting in the NT, but finalised explicitly in the postbiblical period.

    From the United Church of God’s web page (
    we find ”The Oxford Companion to the Bible’s opening words under the article “Trinity” enlightening: “Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the [New Testament] canon” (Bruce Metzger and Michael Coogan, editors, 1993, p. 782, emphasis added throughout these quotations).” … Continuing with the account in The Oxford Companion to the Bible: “While the New Testament writers say a great deal about God, Jesus, and the Spirit of each, no New Testament writer expounds on the relationship among the three in the detail that later Christian writers do” (p. 782).

  27. Michael P says:

    First, I’ve said this before, not sure if I have here or not, but elsewhere I know I have: if we are not careful, we will argue God away. This is directly related to the question at hand: are we to be afraid of Matthew 7:21-23?

    And if we argue God away, or even get God wrong, we are on the outside looking in.

    Now Subgenious, it is a test. That is pretty clear, even you admit that it is by saying you pass it. And it took me a few readings through it to understand why you actually fail it. You deny who Jesus is. Jesus come in the flesh is a reference to Jesus, God and Spirit in flesh, and not a separate being. You deny Jesus in the flesh by denying his oneness with the Father and the Spirit. You deny who he truly is.

    Why am I a denomination? I am not, though the question is poorly stated. I go to a non-denominational, though my wife grew up Baptist and I went to a Methodist Church. Neither of us is tied into these to not look to a church, no matter its ties, that looks to Christ. All of the Christians I know think the same. Why, then, might they go to a Lutheran church over another? Perhaps thier families went to a Lutheran church. Perhaps its closest to home. Perhaps they are most comfortable there. But I know not a single person who would shun another denomination on that basis alone. We are all under Christ, and as I said before, the differences you seek does not necessitate the division you seek.

  28. falcon says:

    As Chritians, we keep going around the mulberry bush with you Mormons. Mormons continually make these wide generalizations without giving examples. For instance you are saying that there are many groups that trace their beginnings to Jesus Christ and the apostles but believe differently than orthodox christians. I would appreciate some examples, some names of these groups so that I could examine who they are and what they believe. To be frank, when dealing with Mormons, we have to continually get you to define your terms and narrow your focus because you tend to be in a total free flow mode. That means, interchanging terms, blurring definitions and taking off down empty trails that do little but confuse the issues. Dr. Laura, a popular radio talk show host and advice giver, often chatises women callers because they say they are “engaged” to a certain man. Dr. Laura will ask, “Do you have a ring and a date (to be married)?” If the woman says “No” Dr. Laura will say, “Then you’re not engaged.” The woman will reply, “But my boyfriend says we ARE engaged.” Dr. Laura will then point out that there is a specific set of criteria by which “engaged” is defined, regardless of what the boyfriend says. We’ve got 2,000 years of Christian history that provide us with a record of how the Christian faith defines itself. History is replete with intense debates that served to identify heretical beliefs, aberrant beliefs and those which may be different but within the orthodox family. That way everyone knows what the standard definitions are so that there can be honest and clear communication.
    Mormons, with their constant flow of revelation and a lack of any real systematic theology look like a “flavor of the month” bunch. In fairness, you did mention the United Church of God and I will check them out as to their orthodoxy. I really don’t want to get into this business of the word “trinity” doesn’t appear in the Bible. The word “grandfather” doesn’t either.

  29. falcon says:

    OK Ralph,
    I did a quick check of your reference to the United Church of God. Their information states: “Holy Spirit of God is not identified as a thrid person in a trinity, but is consistently described as the power of God.” So they are outside the mainstream of orthodox Christian doctrine. I can see why you would quote them but being outside the orthodox Christian family, their doctrinal stance really doesn’t do anything to bolster your argument. The Church fathers battled back heresy throughout the first four centuries of Church history. Now if you want to hop on the bandwagon of rejected heretical doctrine, that, of course, is your choice. But then you are not an orthodox Christian. And why does any of this matter? Because getting the nature of God right is essential for salvation. A false god cannot save, only deceive. Satan is more than happy to appear as an angel of light to provide suprernatural feelings and signs in order to support a false gospel. You support a man who put a magic rock in a hat, stuffed his face in the hat, and bingo had revealed new scripture and a subsequent new gospel. That is your hope for eternal life? I think I’d push the reset button if I were you.

  30. Rick B says:

    We have coverd the trinity topic in depth on this blog, but one quick verse for you.

    Read ALL of Acts Chapter 5. When Ananias and his wife lied about the money, Peter said in verse 3, Ananias why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the HOLY SPIRIT. Then at the end of verse 4, Peter ends with, you have not lied to men, but to GOD. Peter says that the Holy Spirit and God are one in the same by saying that. Peter did not state that two different Gods were lied to.

    Then in Isiah 43:10 God says, Before me their was no God Formed, nor shall their be after me.

    Now if that verse is true, How can God have a father who is a god? or how can Jesus be a created god after God the father? God said none will be formed after Him. Now many LDS answer this and say, their are no gods that we worship before or after God the father. But God does not say, Do not worship gods before me or after me, so please answer better than that.

    Then we read in Hebrews 6:13 For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself.

    Now again, How can God say this, if His Father is a god, that would make him greater, but God could not swear by one greater, because their is none greater. Rick b

  31. subgenius says:

    MichaelP, you, of course, understand that i agree with your explanation of the “test”, however the reason i say it is not a “test” is because i see that it is you that have failed because you deny the true nature of Jesus. Therefore your supposed test is no test at all; there is no means for evaluation, assessment, or measure – either temporal or spiritual.”non-denominational” simply means that you have not aligned yourself with an already organized church, there is still an indentifiable standard and the primary focus is that each congregation is autonomous, this is a peculiar “sect” of Christianity. You are actually denominational it is just unofficial.
    You obviously agree that Satan is a spirit created by God and he is thus your “spirit brother’. Additionally i am limited to only the true LDS church, i have stated before that denominations are often in error.
    your ‘enagement’ argument is flawed. engagement is a “promise”, the wearing of a ring is simply traditional (roman) – mainly used in USA UK CANADA and a few others.Surely you can be engaged in other countries? Not that Dr. Laura isnt a great reference to use in this forum (ugh). I find it interesting that you assume the 2,000 year history has provided a clear and consistent view of Christianity, are you sure about that? This brings about thae quote Sharon has posted on another topic – 2Timothy3:16-17.
    …by the way i give you examples, all the time, to which you never respond or provide your own. Maybe you should “put up’
    “Christainity” does not appear in the Bible either

  32. Michael P says:


    No, the test is in who we define as Christ. And yes, there is a means to evaluate, assess, and measure. This is what we have been discussing all along. We evaluate, assess, and measure beliefs based on the Bible, on scripture. You evaluate, assess, and measure based on the spirit. What you do not define is exactly, and I mean exactly, what that spirit is or who guides it. Given that, I can see why you say there is no means to evaluate, assess, and measure.

    And if you use these standards, denominations offer nothing different. Our differences lie in preferences for things outside of Christ, like how to administer baptism or whether or not God calls us or we go to him first. No denomination (outside of heretical faiths) I know of differs on the nature of Christ. If you have specifics, as Falcon has asked, please provde.

  33. Jeffrey says:

    Sub, good morning to you!

    From what I’ve read it seems like you are trying to show that Christians also believe that Satan is Jesus’s spirit brother? And that we as well, are his spirit brother’s and sisters?

    I can reference scripture if you prefer, I just cant look into all that right now because I’m at work. But, the Bible states that Lucifer was a created being, an Angel, (not by physical relation between “Heavenly Father” and “Heavenly Mother”, but by His power. The same power that created the universe. Even if there was a pre-existence, we still wouldn’t be Lucifers “spirit brothers”.

  34. falcon says:

    Well sub here’s where you have a problem. I had no preexistance, thus Satan and I can’t be “spirit brothers”. But if you want to claim him as your brother……….
    Hold it partner. What gives you the authority to say you are in the “true” LDS church. Obviously you have no proof of that. The FLDS, Community of Christ, and the Temple Lot folks along with various off shoots, sects, dare I say denominaitons of Mormonsism may have something to say about that. In fact, I’d say the Utah bunch are probably the apostates. They dump doctrine, change temple rites and cut and run any time the pressure gets too much. I’m reading “The Politics of American Religious Identity” about the seating of Senator Reed Smoot back at the turn of the 20th century. This was the Mormon reformation brought about by the U.S. government and not by prophetic revelation. Dig into history, you may find some interesting things out about the reformed Utah LDS religion.
    See here’s where Mormons have a problem, they don’t like definitions. My example regarding the term “engagement” was an example of why we need clear definitions when communicating about what something means. You continually miss the point of the discussion. And besides, what have you got against Dr. Laura anyway? Seems that she teaches sound moral principles on her program. Boy, I can see you’re really desperate to critize if you have to pick on poor old Dr. Laura. Besides it was an example, something we bloggers wish you’d use more of instead of Mormon slogans, urban legends and folk doctrine.

  35. subgenius says:

    The Holy Spirit guides my spirit through the scriptures and it is a gift (Acts 2:38, Eph 6:17 1Cor 6:19 John 14:17). I evaluate,assess and measure that you fail the test. You failed to know the nature of “trinity”, of the “definition” of Christ – see its easy to say you failed without justification.

    The nature of Christ goes beyond “God-Man”. The “invisible unity” of churches falls away over theology. However, i concede that most denominations have the same Major doctrines of Christian Faith; this doesnt make it true, just same.

    I am not trying to “show” anything, i was asking questions, which seldom ever get answered.
    However, your take on Satan the former Angel is interesting. Job 38:4-7 speaks of how “the sons of God shouted for joy” when God laid the foundations for earth. This is often used to show that angels were created after heaven and before earth. However, i really enjoy the fact that it is “sons” in this verse. Anyone care to bite on how God has “sons” not of this earth? Now they are supposed to be greater than us but not greater than God (2sam 14:20, Mat 24:36). though mat 22:30 is daunting can we ignore Hebrews 12:22-23? (sorry this is the man-as-god vs. man-is-god argument). nevertheless Catholic tradition is Traducian (our body and soul are passed down since Adam, thus original sin) i believe 2Cor 5:17 discounts that notion, therefore Our heavenly father created our souls. Nevertheless, Satan being called an angel may or may not be true (eph 2:2). The scriptures use the same word for Holy Spirit, human spirit/soul, and angel. So we all agree that he is not Holy Spirit – and we know that God forbid him a “body” as if he could have had one, something only jesus and us had. Do not all of us and all of things have Our Heavenly Father in common?

  36. Rick B says:

    Ok sub,
    I was going to use this example anyway, but since you quote Job, lets see what you think of this.

    God speaks to Job and says to him, Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? where were you Job when I did this and that?

    If we were around in the “pre=existance” as LDS claim, God should have said, Dont you remember when I laid the foundations of the earth, Job, dont you remember when I did this or that? Were were not around. Rick b

  37. subgenius says:

    Rick B
    First, our belief is such that we remember nothing of our “pre-existence” life. Furthermore God often asks questions which are meant as “tests” for us. When God asks Cain where Abel is, God knows what has happened to Abel and where Abel is, so why ask Cain?, because of Our Heavenly Father’s gift of free-will. He was testing Cain. The same is true with Job, he is challenging Job on the heels of Job’s dilemna. God reminds us they he is Our Father and we also know that he made heaven and earth before he made us. Our pre-existence was not prior to everything that was made. So us not being around for those works does not negate pre-existence. I also do not believe that is the lesson God is giving Job, and us, in Job 38.

  38. Ralph says:


    In answer to your question ”For instance you are saying that there are many groups that trace their beginnings to Jesus Christ and the apostles but believe differently than orthodox christians. I would appreciate some examples, some names of these groups so that I could examine who they are and what they believe. Here is a quote from the United Church of God home page that states they are derived from the early church. ”The literature on this site is published by the United Church of God, an International Association, which has ministers and local congregations in the United States and many countries around the world. We trace our origins to the Church that Jesus founded in the early first century. We follow the same teachings, doctrines and practices established then. Our commission is to proclaim the gospel of the coming Kingdom of God to all the world as a witness and teach all nations to observe what Christ commanded (Matthew 24:14; 28:19, 20). Also I believe that the Roman Catholic Church lay a similar claim, that their first pope received his authority from Peter.

    Then your next quote “I did a quick check of your reference to the United Church of God. Their information states: “Holy Spirit of God is not identified as a thrid person in a trinity, but is consistently described as the power of God.” So they are outside the mainstream of orthodox Christian doctrine.” You evangelicals have a very restricted definition of who is and who isn’t Christian which tends to make you think you have a monopoly on the word. But that has been discussed in other blogs, I’m just making an observation.

    Yes we have done the Trinity to death, but someone made the point that only the true Christ can save. If the Trinity is not in the Bible then it cannot be the true Christ/God.

    Now as for what I am trying to say when I point out using scholastic findings that the Trinity is not in the Bible I have found another 2 sources


  39. Ralph says:

    Notice this admission in the New Bible Dictionary: “The term ‘Trinity’ is not itself found in the Bible. It was first used by Tertullian at the close of the 2nd century, but received wide currency and formal elucidation only in the 4th and 5th centuries” (1996, “Trinity”).

    The same dictionary explains that “the formal doctrine of the Trinity was the result of several inadequate attempts to explain who and what the Christian God really is . . . To deal with these problems the Church Fathers met in 325 at the Council of Nicaea to set out an orthodox biblical definition concerning the divine identity.” However, it wasn’t until 381, “at the Council of Constantinople, [that] the divinity of the Spirit was affirmed . . .””

    And then ”Another theological source admits that there was “an impression of binitarianism [that is, two in unity, the Father and Son] given by much second- and third-century thought . . . Pluralist thinkers . . . maintained the full co-presence of the two (later three) distinct entities within the Godhead . . .” (Alan Richardson, editor, A Dictionary of Christian Theology, 1969, p. 345, emphasis added).”

    So 4 Bible Dictionaries – Harpers, New Bible Dictionary, Dictionary of Christian Theology and Oxford Companion to the Bible – all state that the Trinity is not in the Bible and is an evolution of post-biblical thought. But all of you here defend the Trinity and reject these scholars’ findings. You have your verses in the Bible which you like to quote to prove it’s there, when most of them are ambiguous or present a duality God. Then you point to us LDS and call us stupid and idiots because we have our verses in the Bible which support our thoughts on God and we reject the standard >1600 year old Trinity. You are doing exactly the same as you are charging us with but you wont accept scholastic criticism back.

  40. Rick B says:

    Ralph said If the Trinity is not in the Bible then it cannot be the true Christ/God.

    Ralph, I cannot see you, does that mean your not real? If you sent me a picture or even showed up to my door, then I would say, I cannot see your brain, does that mean you do not have one?

    Sub, I knew you were going to say, we cannot remember the pre-existance.

    LDS seem to have a lot of information for something they cannot remember. Then also if the PRE-existance was true, then God knew we were around so that would make him a liar, not a test given to Job. Rick b

  41. falcon says:

    If the Church of God says that they can trace their church to the one Jesus founded in the first century, that pretty much ends the argument. I mean if they say it, then it must be true. It would then follow that their doctrine is also true. It probably means that the Mormon church is true also, right? I can do Mormon logic.
    The red herring of the word “trinity” is not in the Bible rears its head again and thus, more Mormon logic here. I can do this: the word Arianism is not in the Bible so……..the word Apollinarianism is not in the Bible so…….the word Nestorianism is not in the Bible so……The point of this logic is, of course, if the word does not appear in the Bible then there is no such thing. Hmmmmmmm mother goddess? What’s the word for progression to godhood? What’s the word for god was once a man? What’s the word for Adam-God. I could go on but the point is made. Mormon rule: No word then it doesn’t exist.
    The truth of the matter is if you don’t get the nature of God right, you have a reason to fear. There is one Christ, one Savior, one Jesus, He is the eternal God-Man, the qualified Savior, fully God, fully Man. Throughout the Bible the nature of God is fully explained available for anyone to see. To reject Him, is to reject the salvation He offers as a free gift.

  42. amanda says:

    I was doing my reading this morning and felt compelled to share this.

    3 Nephi 29: 5-6

    5. Wo unto him that spurneth at the doings of the Lord; yea, wo unto him that shall deny the Christ and his works!

    6. Yeah, wo unto him that shall deny the revelations of the Lord, and that shall say the Lord no longer worketh by revelation, or by prophecy, or by gifts, or by tongues, or by healings, or by the power of the Holy Ghost!

    Falcon, I suggest you look up “spurn” in the dictionary. If you don’t have to, I’ll be truly impressed!

  43. subgenius says:

    The quote from Job is misunderstood by you. God is not asking Job where he was because God did not know where he was, but rather God is making a point to Job. Perhaps you should read that verse in its context.
    We typically use Jeremiah 1:5 “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee….” How does God know Jeremiah “before”? – Now, the argument can be made that Jer 1:5 speaks to God having “foreknowledge” of jeremiah’s existence on earth not any pre-existence. However, is that not the same, what does it mean to be in God’s “brain”, is this a state of non-existence? We were not imaginations of or premonitions from Our Heavenly Father, he is not like us, we are like Him and never His equal. I also notice that Jeremiah 1:5 states that He “knew” Jeremiah NOT “knew of” Jeremiah. I do not coincide with the Catholic doctrine that the “one-universal-regenerating-soul” came from Adam, The soul is given by God upon each individual. LDS pre-existence can be sketchy to define at times, however we believe in the Divinity of this mystery. Catholics derive their entire theology from the “mystery” of the trinity. Some things God does not want us to “figure” out. If you have ever explored Philosophy you would know that Plato’s theory of Forms also supports pre-existence and some LDS-critics use it to claim that LDS plagiarised pre-existence.
    Also your “brain” argument with Ralph is tragically flawed. Perhaps it is true that since you can not see his brain you do not “know”, however you sure do beleive he has one. Books have taught you and you were convinced. The Bible also teaches us that the Godhead has a “true” nature and the bulk of scripture supports LDS doctrine on this point (as the dead horse is beaten more). Read elsewhere on this blog to discover what you actually “know”.

  44. falcon says:

    So where do I go with your comments? Are they meant to be a personal indictment of my walk with Jesus? Do you want to get into some sort of contest here regarding personal experiences with spiritual manifestations and signs and wonders as reported in the Book of Acts?
    If I tell you that I speak in tongues, prophesy and have been part of acts of healing and have received the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, where does that leave you?
    You’re making judgements about things of a personal nature that you have little knowledge of. Based on your past comments, I would also suggest that your knowledge of the Gifts of the Spirit and their role in the NT Church.
    I really don’t think you want to go any further on this topic. It may be the jolt that will take you out of your comfort zone and into a spiritual realm that can’t cooexist with your current situation. God may be promting you to lead you out. I don’t think your prepared to go there.

  45. Michael P says:


    “The Holy Spirit guides my spirit through the scriptures and it is a gift (Acts 2:38, Eph 6:17 1Cor 6:19 John 14:17). I evaluate,assess and measure that you fail the test.”

    What does the Holy Spirit use to guide it? What are its standards to evaluate, test, and measure? How do you know the spirit is telling you the truth?

    “You failed to know the nature of “trinity”, of the “definition” of Christ – see its easy to say you failed without justification.”

    Of course its easy to say it. Now prove it. Actually, don’t even prove it, give me a solid resaon to believe I have failed. That the word “trinity” is not in the Bible doesn’t count. Others have demonstrated this, on both sides. What, by the way, are those definitions that I have failed to meet?

    “The nature of Christ goes beyond “God-Man”. The “invisible unity” of churches falls away over theology.”

    The nature of Christ is bigger than God-Man, though do you know what that is? Why is it important or not important? Why did God become Man? What points of theology does unity fail? How do you know and who says?

    “However, i concede that most denominations have the same Major doctrines of Christian Faith; this doesnt make it true, just same.”

    True, but neither do the small existing differences necessitate apostasy. This is the point.

    And on to another discussion: pre-existence. Why must there be a pre-existence? What is gained? And really, is it just me or do Mormons seek to have finite answers for everything?

  46. subgenius says:

    How ironic that you beckon me to “prove it” after countless requests 4 u 2 do the same. Did you read where i wrote “see its easy to say…” ? i was mocking those who claim righteousness through their rhetoric. Obviously that i was not going to “prove” you failed, because there is no “test” and you have been yet to prove there is.

    The Holy Spirit uses “the small quiet voice” – The mission of the HS is to bear witness of the Father and the Son and of the truth of all things
    On the subject of “trinity” see my posts on “Privelage to worship…” and “As does the Bible…” That topic has been beat to death,if you have not read those posts then ask and i will compile them for you, so it will be simple for you, you like simple dont you?

    The major problem with denominations is they are created from the tolerance of the inconsistent and often misdirected organization and teachings of the Gospel delivered by Christ. None of the Protestants or Catholics have the Church organized to what is known of Jesus’s primitive church – except the LDS. Your notion that “though we are different we are the same” is just delusional. Yes, i believe that “mormon” is actually more true to the Church of Jesus and the “denominations” should be trying to prove their Christianity. Just because all the denominations believe in a unified trinity of “God_MAn” just makes them all wrong…..together.
    The small differences are just symptoms of the apostasy, the incorrect teachings of Gospel Doctrine are how the ‘denominations’ fell away.

    Pre-existence is important – this is where Our Heavenly Father “fore-ordains” our talents and callings as part of His plan (remember he knew us before the womb). This is vital to our free-will on earth. Jesus was foreordained before he was on earth, true? or do you believe that God chose a child that was here? the natural body is sown and the spirit is raised (1Cor 15:44)
    Finite answers? you seem to be in that position right now. 🙂

  47. Jeffrey says:

    Subgenious said,

    “The major problem with denominations is they are created from the tolerance of the inconsistent and often misdirected organization and teachings of the Gospel delivered by Christ. None of the Protestants or Catholics have the Church organized to what is known of Jesus’s primitive church – except the LDS.”


    It’s rather easy for you to say that, isn’t it? To just make a blanket statement about traditional Christianity. You won’t say what exactly is the “inconsistent and misdirected teachings” that Christianity proclaims though. Just because LDS corp. uses the names apostles/prophets/etc. just HAS to mean that what the LDS church teaches is true. I mean, it even has Jesus Christ in the church name. It would be nice to have your “prophet” correct/add what “plain and precious truths” are missing from the Bible so all of Christianity could now have it plain as day. Maybe there will be evidence to give credence to the additions/corrections!

    I have been looking into Freemasonry a bit lately. It wasn’t any sites that tried to compare the LDS church to them, it was simply just about Freemasonry, its rituals, etc..

    Anyways, having attended a ward for the past 5 years, almost every sacrament meeting, members typically are asked to vote by “raising their hand to the square.” I never made a real connection with simple acts performed in general meetings like that, but if you look into freemasonry. It’s all about the “Square and Compass”. And in the rituals, people raise their hands to the square. If you had your endowments, I’m sure you familiar with all the signs/tokens(or handshakes). Reminds me of a funny term I heard from my wife yesterday for the temple. IHOH – International house of handshakes. In fact, the term brethren or brother “so and so” is thrown around a lot both in LDS wards and Masonic Lodges.

    I’m not sure if you looked into what freemasonry was/is about, but the similarities are very interesting.

  48. Ralph says:


    Only one of the Dictionaries said that the word “Trinity” is not in the Bible, but that was never my point. My point was that ALL of them said that the doctrine/description/definition of the Trinity is not found in the Bible but is a post-biblical evolution of ideas and despite this evidence you still wish to believe in the Trinity. In this light what is wrong with me believing in my church as I have the Biblical verses/proof that my ideology of God is true. Why do you and others insist on saying that we are idiots/silly/etc for believing in what we do when it’s based in the Bible just like your belief?

    I pasted in the comments from the UCG website about them tracing their church/practices back to Jesus because you challenged me to show you other churches that claim that point. In my eyes it does not make them any more correct than another church, but it lays a burden of proof at your feet to show that your claim to be the only true religion/church that can trace your roots to the original church is a correct claim.

    Finally, I do agree with you, there is only one Christ and Saviour and it is only through Him that we are saved. But His nature is not clearly defined in the Bible, hence the differing ideologies about it (ie LDS Godhead, Trinity, Modalism, JW, etc).

    RickB said “I cannot see your brain, does that mean you do not have one?” As the saying goes in my circles – I have a PhD, it proves I DO NOT have a brain. Does this answer your question?

    As for your argument about not being able to see me and comparing it to the lack of evidence of a Trinity in the Bible, you are comparing apples to oranges. If the Trinity doctrine is not in the Bible (as the 4 Bible dictionaries claim) then it’s not there. It does not mean that God doesn’t exist, it just means that the Trinity is not in the Bible.

  49. eric017 says:

    I view the concept of the Trinity as a way to understand the nature of God with our feable human minds. God, being ever-existing, omniscient, omnipresent, etc., is manifest in different forms in different places in the Bible. It is not possible to truly understand the nature of God, as God transends space and time (an aside: of course he knew Jeremiah, he knows what I am going to type just now, before I type, this passage in Jeremiah in no way implies that Jeremiah existed before birth) in a way that is incomprehensible to us. So, the Trinity offers a way that we can conceptualize the nature of God as described in His Word with our limited knowledge as humans. The word Trinity doesn’t need to be in the Bible, because it is a way of conceptualizing God as described in the Bible without adding anything extra-Biblical.

    Mormonism offers a concept of the nature of God that is far different, and has the hubris to suggest that men can become gods. There is one fact that tells me this is not true…I am not all-knowing now. I can think of only three reasons why Mormons believe this: Joseph Smith said so, it feels good to believe like thier peers, and it may make intuative sense to some. But ultimately it all comes back to the First Vision story. One thing that signifies mistrust of a person is that their stories change. Smith’s account of the first vision changed over time. It was only after a long peroid of Smith’s evolving theology that we arive at the version taught by the missionaries (this explains why the BoM describes God as a spirit).

    Now, if gaining acceptance before God requires that we accept Jesus, it stands to reason that we need to understand who we are accepting. Smith offers us a number of countrary descriptions of his first vision. So, if getting the nature of God right is important, which of Smith’s versions should we believe?

  50. subgenius says:

    The trinity as God with many personalities is the definition of “xtra-biblical”-the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost. The debate of “trinity” is not if the word is in the Bible but rather from where did the origin of the erroneous “3-in-1” concept arise?
    You say God “knows” “predicts”, etc.. you speak as if he were a man, yet admit that he is beyond comprehension. Can u explain 1Cor15:44 ? Where is the spirit “raised” from? If spirits depart our bodies and are able to go to heaven, then u believe the spirit can exist in God’s presence. Then where is God’s spirit workshop? -on earth? in heaven?

    God gave us the gift of Jesus and of the Holy Ghost. There is a reason that they are distinct in personage throughout the Bible – it is because they are ‘distinct’. Otherwise “God” would be used as the subject for all those verses. Do not confuse the puppet with the puppeteer while you sit in the audience, but please, enjoy the show.

    I should say “the tail does not wag the dog” because the 3-in-1 idea of the trinity is a symptom of how Protestants/denominations have been unaware that they perceive outwardly that which they conceive inward – you see what you have chosen to see. The meaning of things is not in the “thing” but your interpretation of the “thing”; when agreement is reached then it is called “reality”. unfortunately this agreement is never completely consenual. When a concept is not “agreeable” reactions are often based on the perception of “being threatened”. Typically this means destroy the “threat” or make it more “agreeable”. Obviously, everyone SEES things differently. This is why i often speak to the “spiritual discernment” of the Bible and BoM, because your acceptance of your inner being influential over the your outer benefits you by “course corrections” as you ponder the truths from Our Heavenly Father.

Comments are closed.