The Mormon Doctrine of Materiality

On May 21, 1845 an article on the nature of God, man, and angels appeared in the LDS publication the “Prophet.” Understood to have been written by the editor, LDS Apostle Parley P. Pratt, the article was reprinted in the 1903 book Mormon Doctrine of Deity by B. H. Roberts. Mr. Roberts identified this article, titled “Materiality,” as one of “A Collection of Authoritative Mormon Utterances on the Being and Nature of God” which he included in Mormon Doctrine of Deity. As a Seventy “noted for his doctrinal knowledge,” Mr. Roberts explained the purpose of the book:

“The task before me, on this occasion, is to take this subject and present to you what in reality the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches with reference to the Godhead.” (page 11)

What follows is a condensation of the main points of Mr. Pratt’s “Materiality” article.

What is God? He is a material intelligence, possessing both body and parts. He is in the form of man, and is in fact of the same species; and is a model, or standard of perfection to which man is destined to attain: he being the great Father and head of the whole family.

He can go, come, converse, reason, eat, drink, love, hate, rejoice, possesss [sic] and enjoy. He can also travel space with all the ease and intelligence necessary, for moving from planet to planet, and from system to system.

This being cannot occupy two distinct places at once. Therefore, he cannot be (in person) everywhere present….

What is Jesus Christ? He is the son of God, and is in every way like his father,… He is material intelligence, with body, parts and passions; possessing immortal flesh and immortal bones. He can…perform all things even as the Father—possessing the same power and attributes. And he, too, can travel space, and go from world to world, and from system to system, precisely like the Father; but cannot occupy two places at once.

What are angels? They are intelligences of the human species. Many of them are offsprings of Adam and Eve. That is, they are like Enoch or Elijah, been translated; or, like Jesus Christ, been raised from the dead;… They can go or come on foreign missions, in heaven, earth, or hell; and they can travel space, and visit the different worlds, with all the ease and alacrity with which God and Christ do the same,…

What are spirits? They are material intelligences, possessing body and parts in the likeness of the temporal body; but not composed of flesh and bones, but of some substance less tangible to our gross senses in our present life; but tangible to those in the same element as themselves. In short, they are men in embrio [sic] –intelligences waiting to come into the natural world and take upon them flesh and bones, that through birth, death, and the resurrection they may also be perfected in the material organization. Such was Jesus Christ, and such were we before we came into this world, and such we will be again, in the intervening space between death and the resurrection.

What are men? They are the offspring of God, the Father, and brothers of Jesus Christ. They were once intelligent spirits in the presence of God, and were with him before the earth was formed. They are now in disguise as it were, in order to pass through the several changes, and the experience necessary to constitute them perfect beings.

They are capable of receiving intelligence and exaltation to such a degree, as to be raised from the dead with a body like that of Jesus Christ’s, and to… go on missions from planet to planet, or from system to system: being Gods, or sons of God, endowed with the same powers, attributes and capacities that their heavenly Father and Jesus Christ possess.

What are all these beings taken together, or summed up under one head? They are one great family, all of the same species, all related to each other, all bound together by kindred ties, interests, sympathies, and affections. In short they are all Gods; or rather, men are the offspring or children of the Gods, and destined to advance by degrees, and to make their way by a progressive series of changes, till they become like their Father in heaven, and like Jesus Christ their elder brother.

Thus perfected, the whole family will possess the material universe, that is, the earth, and all other planets, and worlds, as “an inheritance incorruptible undefiled and that fadeth not away.” They will also continue to organize, people, redeem, and perfect other systems which are now in the womb of Chaos, and thus go on increasing their several dominions, till the weakest child of God which now exists upon the earth will possess more dominion, more property, more subjects, and more power and glory than is possessed by Jesus Christ or by his Father; while at the same time Jesus Christ and his Father, will have dominion, kingdoms, and subjects increased in proportion.

Such are the riches, glories, blessings, honors, thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers, held out by the system of materialism.

Such the wealth, the dignity, the nobility, the titles and honors to which “Mormons” aspire. Such the promises of him whose word can never fail.

With these hopes and prospects before us, we say to the Christian world, who hold to immateriality, that they are welcome to their God–their life—their heaven, and their all.

They claim nothing but that which we throw away, and we claim nothing but that which they throw away. Therefore, there is no ground for quarrel, or contention between us. (Mormon Doctrine of Deity, pages 255-258)

The Christian world, along with the Apostle Paul, is content with “their all”:

For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. (2 Corinthians 4:5)

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 Afterlife, Family, God the Father, Jesus Christ, Nature of Man. Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to The Mormon Doctrine of Materiality

  1. Andrea says:

    Such the wealth, the dignity, the nobility, the titles and honors to which “Mormons” aspire.

    That says a lot to me right there.

  2. falcon says:

    Here’s your problem, that was when, May 1845? It might not count anymore even if it was spoken by a prophet. What’s kind of interesting is that this is embraced, I guess, by the Utah LDS and their kissing cousins in the FLDS. The Community of Christ, which I believe was headed by Joseph Smith’s son and which Emma, JS wife was a member says: “The one eternal, living God is triune: one God in three persons. The God who meets us in the testimony of Israel is the same God who meets us in Jesus Christ, and who indwells creation as the Holy Spirit. God is the Eternal Creator, the source of love, life, and truth……..All things that exist owe their being to God who alone is worthy of our worship.” I guess somebody didn’t get the memo on the nature of God that Parley Pratt sent out.
    Certain attributes of God are “incommunicable”, that is, he can’t share them with us. These are: self-existence, unchangeability, immutability, omnipresence (God is everywhere), omnipotence (God is all-powerful) eternality (God is eternal). Those attributes that can be shared with us are: holiness, justice, righteousness, goodness-love, grace, mercy, general benevolence for mankind and truth.
    Now does the above discription sound like what old PP was quoted as saying above? I don’t think so. Someone doesn’t have it right when it comes to the nature of God. Nothing much riding on this…..only salvation, eternal life little things like that.

  3. iamse7en says:

    Elder Pratt’s words sure ring true to me. Thanks for the inspiring post.

  4. mobaby says:

    A god who cannot be everywhere present – is not a god I can trust. He is very limited and not very powerful. How can he hear my prayers if he is merely an exalted man traveling around from planet to planet like some kind of extraterrestrial alien? An exalted man unable to be present with me in worship, struggles, sin, triumphs, etc. would seem to have little knowledge of what is going on in this world. A very small god indeed. Millions of people praying to an exalted man with limited ability to be present in their lives. A god going on missions? In other words, he has to travel to places to communicate and evangelize? And he can only be in one place. Wow – not much chance to get to know a god like that. Very few I would venture would ever even have the remotest possibility of knowing a “heavenly father” of those limited capabilities.

    Praise God that He is indeed infinitely more powerful and awesome than the description given by Pratt above. Heavenly Fathers adopted children know Him deeply and intimately – and He is present with them in their lives – bringing both peace and chastisement.

  5. Andrea says:

    Here’s the problem though, Parley wrote this way back when, and one of the Seventy who was considered an expert on Mormon doctrine basically validated the article -but it might not be taught as doctrine anymore. It’s another symptom of the Mormon Church frequently changing their story and their doctrines, trying to sanitize their history and image.
    When they say “the brethen speak (and) the thinking has been done” and that the words of the prophet are scripture, they can’t then pick and choose which ideas fit in with theirs and excuse the others away by saying “he’s a fallible man who was mistaken” while at the same time saying ‘all his words come from God’.

  6. germit says:

    Andrea: dear child, “they can’t then pick and choose…” are you feeling OK?? Oh yes they can, they have, and they will. Are you trying to impose rationality and logical consistency on the LDS?? What got ahold of you, were you drinking the expresso this morning? The more you hold this cut and paste faith to that kind of standard, the more you are going to hear the ‘wisdom of men’ sermon, with liberal doses of ‘revelation’ and ‘the power of God’ thrown in. Am I forgetting any other trump cards?? If it’s any consolation, Eckhart Tolle,and many others, is as bad or worse: for him it’s ‘transcendence to a higher consciousness’. He’ll show us the way if we leave rationality out of it. Not that different. PS: Your description of the LDS god is apt: that is one PUNY god. GERMIT

  7. GRCluff says:

    Two comments on this article from the “still inside” perspective:

    1. Why the concern on “pick and choose”? The article looks spot on to me. I can’t see where anyone has changed our beliefs on the subject, picked anything out for rejection, or chosen anything for focus. It all works for me.

    2. Brother Pratt did miss something important. We still believe that God is all powerful and all knowing. Whatever limitations he has on his physical presence does NOT extend to limit his ability to answer prayer, or know even the smallest concern of each of his children.

    Matt 6:26 Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?

  8. germit says:

    To all: I think it was James R. White who commented that the fundamental error of LDS theology was in trying to exalt man, that their picture and conception of God followed a twisted picture of man and who man was intended to be and become. In this respect, the LDS picture of god very much reminds me of the Greek idea: God is not ontologically different, Zues is just ‘more of the same’: like man on super steroids. The LDS try and ‘christianize’ their god, but in the end he falls to the earth, again like Zues, under the weight of a nature that is just not like that of I AM. Interesting that Satan’s creations don’t really wander that far from home. As I’ve posted before, the same man, JS, who explained God for us also explained moon people for us, with the very same confident attitude. And yeah, I have NO problem understanding that ‘he was only speaking as a man’, we are in perfect agreement about that. GRC I appreciate you quoting the bible for OUR benefit, but we both know it means very little to you. I say this without malice, just a statement of (what I see to be ) fact.

  9. Andrea says:

    The pick and choose comment wasn’t specifically about this article. There are teachings of elders and prophets (BY’s Adam-God theory comes to mind) that the church hierarchy would rather not acknowledge now and brush off as ‘never taught as doctrine’ even though it was.
    The part about the church changing and sanitizing does relate to this -the things mentioned in this article are part of Mormon belief but it’s not taught outright to investigators or new converts. It’s not until one is indoctrinated that one is taught this. And that’s deceitful, in my opinion.

  10. footdoc1 says:

    Back as footdoc, obviously, my computer saavy is wanting. I feel for Cluff being the lone voice here, so I will give him my second.

    Pick and choose? The doctrine is still the same. Critics love the whole Adam-God thing because they have two quotes, that are isolated from the surrounding text, and then try to say Young is teaching a doctrine that makes no sense with the rest of his life’s teachings. Bottom line with this Pratt quote: The doctrine is still the same. A fixed target for this crowd. God is exactly who he says he is. Post Resurrection Luke 28:39 “Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.” It’s me guys! I have risen from the dead! I am an exalted man! (Sorry for the paraphrase) Can He be any more clear than that! His disciples still didn’t believe it. “You mean you’re an exalted man? Not just some immaterial cosmic force? Let’s see do we have any fish to eat, we still don’t believe it. Maybe we are being deceived. This is the Jesus of the NT. This is the Jesus we believe in. If this isn’t who He is then where can I find the information? The Nicean Creed? They took month of bickering and endless documents to come up with a definition that in no way resembles Luke’s account. Talk about pick and choose… they just chose not to pick and choose from any terms or phrases found in the scriptures.

    Andrea: Missionary discussion have changed to a nonstructured format, but in my day first lesson, first principle was God the Father (distinct being of flesh and bone)… by the way most of my Christian friends believe this wholeheartedly and insist their minister would agree. Maybe you should enlighten them.

    Germit: Exalted? Does the Bible really mean that much to you? I’m sure you believe Matt 23:12 “And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.” But that doesn’t fit your doctrine so you I’m sure it must be an allegory????

  11. Arthur Sido says:


    When a man claims to be the sole prophet on earth, the very living voice of God, then he better be sure that when he speaks on matters of doctrine that he is not just pulling stuff out of…well, wherever.

    “Missionary discussion have changed to a nonstructured format, but in my day first lesson, first principle was God the Father (distinct being of flesh and bone)… by the way most of my Christian friends believe this wholeheartedly and insist their minister would agree. Maybe you should enlighten them.”

    That is a farce, I don’t know a single Christian, I mean not one, that believes that God has a body of flesh and bones. If you find someone who claims to be a Christian and thinks God has a physical body, please send them my way and I can explain why that is heretical and false.

    I also know that the missionary lessons don’t touch on any of the really goofy stuff about mormonism. Of course no talking about the temple, secret not sacred don’t you know, no talking about the garments. Polygamy was brushed over. Exaltation to godhood didn’t come up if I recall correctly.

  12. Soy Yo says:

    I have now read this post a few times and I just noticed a part that for some reason did not stand out to me before. It has to be one of the most blasphemous and incomprehensible statements I have ever heard in my 29 years in Mormonism.

    “They will also continue to organize, people, redeem, and perfect other systems which are now in the womb of Chaos, and thus go on increasing their several dominions, till the weakest child of God which now exists upon the earth will possess more dominion, more property, more subjects, and more power and glory than is possessed by Jesus Christ or by his Father;”

    I have hard it taught that they can become LIKE God but I can not believe they taught at one time that they can become MORE then God.

  13. Arthur Sido says:

    Soy Yo, I would guess that the answer would be that God, being a perfected man after all, continues to progress so that He would continue to progress. What we were told by the missionaries is that we would continue to progress as well, but we would never become on the same level as God. But you are right though that it is a blasphemous heresy to even assume that fallen, sinful man could ever become gods.

  14. Ralph says:

    Soy Yo,

    You missed the last part of the sentence which states “while at the same time Jesus Christ and his Father, will have dominion, kingdoms, and subjects increased in proportion.

    Note the part I bolded. This whole sentence you have pointed to, including the part you missed out, means that while we as God’s children will inherit power and authority from our Father and organise worlds and their inhabitants, there will come a time where we will have more than Heavenly Father and Jesus do AT THIS POINT IN TIME. The clarifier, which you missed, states that Heavenly Father and Jesus will be doing the same and will always have more than us.


    One of the attributes which you say cannot be shared with us is wrong. That is omnipotence. It says in the Bible that we are joint-heirs with Jesus and it says that Jesus inherited all power and authority from God. Note – all power and authority – there are no clarifiers. So we are set to gain all power and authority the same as Jesus did.


    Your little question about how can God be limited in geography but omnipresent and hear everyone’s prayers has an answer that we cannot fathom at this point in time. Jesus has a physical body, but you still describe Him as being omnipresent and omnipotent and being able to hear all prayers. Do you understand how He can do this?


    Consider, if Jesus’ atonement has made one perfect and God remembers those sins no more, then when resurrection and judgment comes is that man sinful or perfect? If God remembers the sins no more than that man cannot be sinful, which means that he must be perfect as he is without sin.

  15. mobaby says:


    Thanks for asking. In response to your question – I believe in the one true God in 3 persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. As someone who has been redeemed by Christ, I know He indwells me through the Holy Spirit, who is present on this earth drawing individuals to trust in the finished work of Christ on the cross. Also, God the Father is everywhere present, yet separate from His creation. That’s how I know Jesus hears my prayers – He indwells me through the power of the Holy Spirit as they are one in essence. I could not worship a god who was merely an exalted man – subject to the frailty of mankind and only present in one place. God holds the universe together. A god who is an exalted man is merely the product of his environment – a self-existent universe.

  16. mobaby says:


    I want to add one thing in response to what you wrote. From what Pratt said, I get no sense of the omnipresence of the god he is describing. It seems very much the opposite – just reading what is in the article above. If in Mormon theology there are other gods ruling over other planets, would the god of earth also be omnipresent there? If not, then this god would not truly be omnipresent. I think the concept of an exalted man being a god and being omnipresent, omnipotent, creator of the universe don’t really fit together well. God was, is, and always will be God. There was no time when He was not God. He created time and holds the universe together.

  17. Berean says:

    Parley Pratt: This particular writing of his could be disputed point by point. For me, every time I hear his name I can’t help but to think of his outrageous conduct when he was doing his mission over in Arkansas. Joseph Smith had introduced to him the concept of plural marriage. The good Parley Pratt decided while in Arkansas to take another man’s wife and children. This man’s name was Hector Mclean. Needless to say, Hector wasn’t too happy about the arrangement. He was angry and a husband scorned. Unfortunately, he took matters into his own hand instead of letting God have the vengeance. Hector shot Parley right off his horse for his adulterous ways.

    This didn’t make Brigham Young very happy. Mormons were taught to avenge the death/blood of the prophets. When the Fancher-Baker party from Arkansas was migrating to California via through Utah we can see how the history of the death of Parley Pratt was just one “piece of the puzzle” that eventually led to the Mountain Mountains Massacre.

    Parley Pratt has no credibility in many ways. His doctrines were false and he was a person of ill repute in moral character. Our LDS friends would be well served if they did some historical reading of their beloved leaders.

  18. germit says:

    Ralph: good to hear from you. If both the Heavenly Father and Jesus enjoy their current status due to obedience to heavenly and eternal principles (do I have that right??} then it is pure presumption on your part that will CONTINUE to make the kinds of choices that would ensure further exaltation. A being that chooses for good can also choose the other way. Your “god” could become the very devil in hell, granted it would take a while. The LDS ontology is a horribly flawed product: a God who was once a man has the possibility to FALL as well as rise, and there is no saying how far the fall. GERMIT
    PS: we go out into the world as ambassadors of the one (Jesus) who has all power and authority, just as an ambassador experiences SOME level of that power personally, the full amount of such is withheld by the king,president, or ruler. We get what a faithful ambassador would get, nothing more or less. Our ‘offspring of God’ identity is very real, but it gains us exalted humanity, NOT godhood. Compare scripture with scripture and try and come to any other conclusion. Like JS, you are hung up on the grammar: “become like God…” which of course IS on the Father’s agenda; we shall be holy, as He is Holy” but never to that measure. That was Satan’s lie in the garden, in a nutshell, as I understand it.

  19. Andrea says:

    Your Christians friends and their pastors would agree that God cannot be and is not omnipresent?? Missionary discussions are “milk before meat” -the first lesson may be on God the Father, but it certainly doesn’t teach the full extent of the nature of the LDS god, as revealed in this article.
    As for Adam-God, I’m not talking about two little quotes taken out of context and I don’t know what you mean by “they say Young is teaching a doctrine that makes no sense with the rest of his life’s teachings”. I’ve read it straight from the JoD. My issues with it have nothing whatsoever to do with anything else he may have taught. BY said it, taught it, wrote it down, therefore it is scripture; but the church wants to backpedal and say “it was never taught as doctrine’.

    How is it that God can speak the universe into existence and knows the name of every star, not a single sparrow falls that he does not know about, yet he cannot be in more than one place at a time? When you (general “you” to all the Mormons) went to sacrament meeting yesterday, did you know God was with you? Cuz if he was, then he couldn’t be with anybody else at that moment. Germit, you are right -that is one puny god.

  20. Ralph says:


    If we are just ambassadors and only get the privilege of “…SOME level of that power personally…” then I guess the Bible is incorrect when it states that we are joint-heirs with Jesus Christ. Legally, joint-heirs inherit the same thing in the same quantity and quality. If the Bible is inspired by God and that word (joint-heirs) was placed in there, then which interpretation is correct?

    Let’s look at Satan’s lie. In Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

    Gen 3 contains the 2 things that Satan told Eve – v4-5 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil

    Note what I have bolded.

    Now lets go to v22-24 “And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.”

    Again note the bold. We see from these verses that Satan told Eve that if they took of the fruit they would not die, but they would know good from evil thus becoming as gods. Then we see God saying that Adam and Eve have become as Him, with knowledge of good and evil, but now they can no longer partake of the fruit of the tree of life and live forever – they must become mortal and die. So the lie was about them NOT DYING, nothing about them not becoming as God knowing good and evil.

  21. Arthur Sido says:


    “Consider, if Jesus’ atonement has made one perfect and God remembers those sins no more, then when resurrection and judgment comes is that man sinful or perfect? If God remembers the sins no more than that man cannot be sinful, which means that he must be perfect as he is without sin.” That is a legitimate question. It is an isssue of imputed righteousness. He who knew no sin became sin for us. Christ was not made less perfect, but the iniquity of His elect was laid upon Him and by His perfect obedience He has made propitiation for their sins. We are sinners, but the penalty for our sin has been paid. God no longer remembers our sin not because we are sinless, but those sins have been atoned for by His Son. Those outside of Christ have no substitute who has paid their debt, and they die in their sins. The penalty for that unredeemed sin is an eternal hell. It is whaat Luther called the great exchange, our sin for His righteousness.

    That is actually a question that many Christians would be confused about. Penal substitutionary atonement is the theological term for it.

  22. DJBrown says:

    Question for those who think eternal progression is a blasphemous doctrine:

    Why can we not become like our Father in Heaven? Is it because He is not powerful, intelligent, or capable enough to create such a possiblity for us? Or is it because He does not love us enough?

    Just a thought. The LDS doctrine does not diminish the greatness of God. I cannot imagine a theology that esteems Him more highly!

  23. germit says:

    Footdr.: ‘your christian friends and their pastors agree that cannot be,and is not, omnipresent…’ yeah, and Ralphs “christian friends” (loosely used) don’t mind polygamy. Ralph, you’ve got mail on this at the end of ‘mormon history’, just a short post. Your questions, and observations above are thought provoking: I’ll work on a reply today, my initial thought is that much of who Jesus is, HE DID NOT INHERIT, HE is fully God AND fully man, the God part is not an inheritance, because HE always had it, didn’t receive it, gain it, or work for it. But I’ll work on a better reply today.
    DJB: if the idea is that God WANTS kids that are ‘just like HIM’ in His ontological otherness, then you are on to something, and if that were His goal, as God, I suppose He could get it done, but the universe was built for one God: I’d say things go haywire when we add parts, particularly gods, that don’t belong, and take the Heavenly Father along for the ride. Interesting to me is the fact that it is God’s JEALOUSY that Oprah couldn’t get her mind around, and that seems to be the push for her into apostasy. hmmmmmmmm. What, and Whom, you esteem and worship is your choice, for me, Gods ‘otherness’ (granted Jesus is BOTH, fully other and fully human) makes HIM more attractive, not less. Glad to have you posting. GERMIT

  24. jackg says:


    Unfortunately, it doesn’t matter if PP words ring true for you because you are not the measuring stick to which his words need to be measured. His words ring hollow and ludicrous when measured against God’s established word. They would ring true for anyone whose belief system is rooted in false teachings and lies. Mormons believe in a god who was created; Christians believe in a God who created out of nothing.


    God-likeness or Christ-likeness is not the same as becoming gods ourselves. Being co-heirs with Christ means we will resurrect and be saved based on His merits, which is the only way we can be saved.

    For all Mormons, God is spirit, even Jesus said so, and then taught us that believers must worship in spirit and in truth (John 4:24). Jesus is the image of the invisible God (Col.1:15). This PP utterance is consistent with LDS leaders: it teaches something other than the message of the Bible and is evidence of what the “wisdom of men” looks like. The wisdom of men goes outside the parameters of the Bible to create a new theology and a new religion. As a defender of the truth, a defender of the true and living God, I must denounce such teachings as this as heresy. Test the spirit you’re following, because it’s leading you away from the truth of God.

  25. DJBrown says:

    “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” Gen 1:26

    “YE are the children of the LORD your God.” Deut 14:1

    “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.” Psalms 82:6

    “Ye are the sons of the living God.” Hosea 1:10

    “Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.” Act 17:29

    “The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God. And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.” Romans 8:16-17

    I respect the beliefs expressed on this website. I do not think it unreasonable to believe that we are literal children of God, created in His image. And I do not think that the LDS teaching contradicts the Bible.

    JackG: With all respect- the instruction that we are to worship God in spirit- does that mean we must leave our bodies to worship Him? We are all spirit, like God. But that does not necessarily mean He has no body.

  26. germit says:

    To All: patience not being my strong suit, here goes the third post, and Ralph, I am ABUSING your patient nature: you will have to wait till at least 1 am., my time (yeah, I don’t sleep much, maybe I’m an exalted bat or vampire..). OK, God promised to make Adam and Evein His image, notice He says ‘let us MAKE..’ so this will be a ‘done deal’ when He’s through: and what does He get when they are made: someone show me the ‘ontological otherness: the omniscience, the omnipresence, the omnipotence of Adam and Eve when all is said and done. God does NOT refer (at this point)to some step by step continued exaltation . This doesn’t seem to fit your theology, and neither does PS 82, you guys should know that we are going to be reading for the CONTEXT, as in the very next verse (v.7) “BUT YOU WILL DIE LIKE MERE MEN; YOU WILL FALL LIKE EVERY OTHER RULER” ps to Ralph: did you pick up the word ‘ruler’, similar to Satan being called the god (ruler) of this world: the word is used as a comparitive description. So ‘you are ‘gods’ is later described as ruler, or in NASB: ‘as any one of the princes..’ Hope this helps, how can this verse POSSIBLY be talking about becoming just exactly like God (or better..??) We can agree that we are God’s children, and that in SOME respects, we are becoming (hopefully) like Him. A ‘biblical’ basis for sharing HIS ‘otherness’ is another kettle of fish. JOINT HEIR study in the works. GERMIT

  27. Andrea says:

    DJBrown wrote: “the instruction that we are to worship God in spirit- does that mean we must leave our bodies to worship Him?”
    I believe (don’t quote me) that it’s like “Not everyone who says to me ‘Lord Lord!’ will enter into heaven”. It means don’t just say with words that you worship him. “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.” (Mark 12:30) I think “to worship Him in spirit and in truth” means to be totally dedicated to Him in all that we do, every moment of every day.

  28. DJBrown says:

    John 17 is a wonderful prayer offered by Jesus with which I am sure you are all familiar. In verse 11 he prays, “And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.” And verse 21: “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us.”

    To me it seems very clear what He is saying. His servants are to be one in some way- the same way He and His Father are one. How are they one? I cannot think they are the same person from this prayer. It doesn’t make sense for Him to pray that his servants be the same person. Rather they are to be completely united in purpose, intention, and desire.

    Germit: What is the basis for your argument regarding the statement “Let us make man in our image?” Where does it say that something made never changes? If anything, Christ’s whole mission was to enable us to change, to become a “new man, new creature.” If Christ created you and me as we entered the world, did He not make us babies? Have we not changed a great deal since then?

    Another question in all honesty: According to your theology, what is the destiny of a saved person? I do not mean to be sacrilegious here. Think about the greatest individuals you have known- did they not get the most enjoyment from seeing other people make the most of themselves. Parents for example. Is it not the greatest thing to see your kids go as far as possible? There is a pattern in the world and nature that I believe God intended. And it very much reflects our relationship to God. He calls Himself our “Father” for a reason.

    Andrea: I understand that John 4:24 means to worship God as you described. I was suggesting that in the context of this verse, the statement that “God is spirit” does not mean he does not also have a body as JackG stated.

  29. jackg says:


    The big problem for us is that we have differing views on the nature of God, which includes the Trinity. What PP suggests goes contrary to established Christian dogma, which is that God is manifest in three Persons, but is not three individuals. To try and dissect and explain the Trinity is futile because it is beyond our understanding. The big thing for me with regard to PP is that he proclaims a god who was himself created, who had a beginning and an existence before becoming a god. This is not the God of the Bible who has always existed and has always been God, who created everything out of nothing. The very matter used to create He created. He didn’t come into some situation where matter already existed. Now, as to your question,I’m not sure if you’re just trying to be funny or sarcastic. When you question me about this, you are actually questioning what Jesus and Paul have said. Don’t you think it’s a huge red flag that LDS teachings put you in a position to question God’s word against your leaders? They contradict each other. As for being children of God, we become children when we believe in Jesus Christ. Believing in Jesus Christ brings justification by faith, and with this comes a change in our relationship to and with God (see 1 John 2:28-3:10). DJB, I have used the same arguments you are using. I understand that you truly believe you are defending truth. You heart is in the right place, but I have to say that your theology is not consistent with the Bible. I espoused your theology, so I know what I’m talking about. We were created for relationship with God. Unfortunately, false prophets have poisoned truth by creating the notion that a relationship with God is not good enough; they have to thrown in the false teaching that we were created to be gods. LDS theology is man-centered, DJB. The words of PP cannot trump the established word of God. Red flags everywhere, DJB. Think about it.

  30. mobaby says:

    Reading and thinking about what Pratt wrote makes me think that Mormon teaching takes the eternal truths that God has revealed about his nature and guts them. Keeping the name Jesus and God the Father, but replacing the theology with something closer to Greek or Roman Mythology than anything in the Bible. They have created an elaborate mythology complete with temples where secret ceremonies are completed so they can become gods just like the god they follow. I just find it troubling that people would follow such false teachings. I pray that their eyes will be opened.

  31. germit says:

    DJB: you hit upon, or borrowed, i don’t care which, a great phrase for “oneness”: shared purpose, intention, and desire. That phrase ROCKS. I’d say the purpose of being saved is a whole LOT of that. As we share in those things, we are made Holy, because we are drawn by ATTRACTION, not COMPULSION, to the living God. We share His heart, His mind , His will. We want what He wants. We become all that humans were meant to be, but we are never not human, we are exalted humans. Back to Adam and Eve: God is done with them sees that ‘it was good’. He likes His work. That doesn’t imply that they are static, but neither does it imply that at some future point they will be God. To ASSUME that is to READ IT INTO THE TEXT, that was my point: believe it if you want, but ‘made in my image’ does not carry with it (from the text) ontological sameness. If you think it does, show me from the text, or feel free to compare scripture with scripture. The ‘parents want their kids to be just like (or better)’ than themselves is stretching the analogy of parenthood too far.God never, from the bible itself, gives us the thought that we will outstrip Him. If you want to use the ‘greater works than these’ verse, fine, I want to know when was the last time you did something (or anyone else) that was GREATER THAN RAISING THE DEAD (a la Lazarus). The verse is true, but has to do with SCOPE, not mightiness of works. Our kids can outstrip us because we are ‘made of the same stuff’. God the Father, the Holy Spirit, and even part of Jesus are made of something “other” something “different”. That’s why they get worship, we don’t, and never will. GERMIT

Comments are closed.