Christianity is a monotheistic religion, but what is Mormonism? Mormonism has been called monotheistic, polytheistic, henotheistic, tri-theistic, and more recently, monolatristic. I don’t know if there is a defined theistic category that fits Mormonism, but let’s look at what these five are, and see which seems best suited for the LDS belief system.
I checked three sources for definitions; they all said essentially the same thing. Provided below are the definitions as found in the Dictionary of -Ologies & -Isms at the Free Online Dictionary (also see The American Heritage Dictionary at the same url and the Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry Dictionary of Theology). These definitions are simplistic, but they are adequate for our purpose here.
- Monotheism: the doctrine of or belief in only one God.
- Polytheism: a belief in, or worship of, many gods.
- Henotheism: a belief in one supreme or specially venerated god who is not the only god.
- Tri-theism: 1) the heretical belief that the Trinity consists of three distinct gods; 2) any polytheistic religion having three gods.
- Monolatry: the worship of one god without excluding belief in others.
Monotheism/Polytheism
In June of 1844 Joseph Smith preached a discourse that has been sub-titled “Plurality of Gods.” He said,
“I believe those Gods that God reveals as Gods to be sons of God, and all can cry, ‘Abba, Father!’ Sons of God who exalt themselves to be Gods, even from before the foundation of the world, and are the only Gods I have a reverence for” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 375).
Mr. Smith also said that humans must “learn how to be Gods…the same as all Gods have done before” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 346), and claimed that whenever he preached on the subject of Deity, “it has always been the plurality of Gods” (ibid, 370).
If we accept the definition of “polytheism” as “a belief in, or worship of, many gods,” according to the teachings of Joseph Smith, Mormonism is polytheistic. But polytheism is a broad classification comprised of narrower sub-categories, including (but not limited to) henotheism, tri-theism and monolatry.
Henotheism
Early LDS apostle Orson Hyde taught,
“There are Lords many, and Gods many, for they are called Gods to whom the word of God comes, and the word of God comes to all these kings and priests. But to our branch of the kingdom there is but one God, to whom we all owe the most perfect submission and loyalty; yet our God is just as subject to still higher intelligences, as we should be to him” (Orson Hyde, “A Diagram of the Kingdom of God.” Millennial Star 9 [15 January 1847]: 23, 24, as quoted in The Words of Joseph Smith, 299).
This does sound like the definition of “henotheism,” a belief in one supreme God who is venerated or worshiped above all other Gods. Yet we should also consider the teaching of a later LDS apostle:
“Three separate personages – Father, Son, and Holy Ghost – comprise the Godhead. As each of these persons is a God, it is evident, from this standpoint alone, that a plurality of Gods exists. To us, speaking in the proper finite sense, these three are the only Gods we worship. But in addition there is an infinite number of holy personages, drawn from worlds without number, who have passed on to exaltation and are thus gods” (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 576).
Tri-theism
Perhaps Mr. McConkie’s statement quoted above would fit here as well. Tri-theism defines the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as three Gods. Joseph Smith’s teaching agreed with Mr. McConkie’s:
“I have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and that the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a Spirit: and these three constitute three distinct personages and three Gods” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 370; emphasis mine).
Monolatrism
Monolatry is defined as the worship of only one God, though there are others that exist. As we have seen above, Bruce McConkie taught that Mormons believe in untold numbers of true Gods, but they worship only the three Gods that pertain to this world. On another occasion Mr. McConkie said,
“We worship the Father and him only and no one else. We do not worship the Son and we do not worship the Holy Ghost. I know perfectly well what the scriptures say about worshipping Christ and Jehovah, but they are speaking in an entirely different sense–the sense of standing in awe and being reverentially grateful to Him who has redeemed us. Worship in the true and saving sense is reserved for God the first, the Creator” (Sermons and Writings of Bruce R. McConkie, 60).
Indeed, the Book of Mormon instructs people to worship Christ (e.g., see 2 Nephi 25:29 and 3 Nephi 11:17), and some LDS leaders have agreed (e.g., Gordon B. Hinckley, Ensign 11/1998, 70). Nevertheless, sixth LDS Prophet and President Joseph F. Smith taught the contrary,
“And yet, while we give the honor and glory unto the Lord God Almighty for the accomplishment of his purposes, let us not altogether despise the instrument that he chooses to accomplish the work by. We do not worship him; we worship God, and we call upon his holy name, as we have been directed in the gospel, in the name of his Son. We call for mercy in the name of Jesus; we ask for blessings in the name of Jesus” (Gospel Doctrine, 139).
Where do we put Mormonism in this array of isms? LDS author Rodney Turner wrote, “Mormonism is simultaneously monotheistic, tri-theistic, and polytheistic. There is but one God, yet there is a Godhead of three, and beyond them, ‘gods many, and lords many’ (1 Cor. 8:5).” (Pearl of Great Price: Revelations from God, H. Donl Peterson and Charles D. Tate, Jr., eds., “The Doctrine of the Firstborn and Only Begotten”).
What do you think? Is it unreasonable to call Mormonism “polytheistic,” as Latter-day Saints often assert? Is the designation “monolatry” a better fit? Because of the lack of consistency in LDS teachings it may be impossible to figure out where Mormonism really belongs. We might, therefore, invent a new term: Mormontheism. But I rather like Aaron’s conclusion. He said, “Whatever they want to call it, it’s spelled i-d-o-l-a-t-r-y.”
———————-
Comments within the parameters of 1 Peter 3:15 are invited.
———————-
Very good Sharon.
That really cleared things up for me! What we have in Mormonism is a confused mess. It’s theological amateur night when it comes to Mormonism. Mormons will come on here and jump up and down and swear they believe in only one god and then whisper in hushed tones “of this world”. In his book “Have You Witnessed to a Mormon Lately” Jim Spencer says that in talking to Mormons about the nature of God, the following must be done.
1. Commit them to the fact of their polytheism.
2. Demonstrate the philosophical basis for monotheism. Walk them through to the logical conclusion that God could not have been created.
3. Show them that the Bible is clearly and absolutely monotheistic.
Very simply Mormons will say that they believe that “As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become.” Mormons will also say that they believe they will become gods. Mormon theology makes it essential for all gods to have first been men. So who was the first god and where did he come from?
The bottom line is that there is no “first” god or father so therefore no first cause. There is no god following Mormon logic.
Joseph Smith said; “….the soul-the mind of man-the immortal spirit. Where did it come from? All learned men and doctors of divinity say that God created it in the beginning; but it is not so: the ery idea lessens men in my estimation…The mind or the intelligence which man possesses is co-equal with God himself.” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith)
The basic revelation of God is contained in the first commandment. “Thou shalt have no other gods beside me.” For those interested in knowing what God says: (Isaiah 43:10-11; Isaiah 44:6-7; Isaiah 44:8; Isaiah 45:5-6; Isaiah 45:18-22; Isaiah 46:8-9)
God spoke these things to remind Israel that He had chosen them and He was their God. The foreign “gods” where no gods at all but merely images in stone and wood. Mormonism violates the primary command of God by creating false gods.
(Attribution:Spencer)
Sharon,
As important as the gospel is, I do not think one can have a meaning conversation about it with a Mormon until one has the right deity. You can call the various Mormonisms that are out there henotheism, tri-theism, or whatever – but what it is not is monotheism. If one accepts eternal regression and progression then there are certainly more gods in Mormonism than there are in any Hinduism.
Yes, the polytheism charge carries a negative connotation but does that make it any less true? From the lips of its own leaders, Mormonism recognizes multiple deities on par with, or even greater than, the God of the Bible. The end goal of every Mormon is some type of deification, so how is that at least not polytheistic?
I suggest that the word “monism” and more specifically “metaphysical monism” be inserted into the conversation because it allows for the many shades that exist in Mormonism yet attempts to get at the heart of the Mormon worldview. There is one universal substance and way that all must obey, even the gods, and this is in fact how the gods “learn[ed] how to be Gods”.
I think mentioning the words “pantheism”, “panentheism”, and “humanism” in the conversation would help as well. If none of that suits you the reader, then I always thought the good-old-fashioned word “heretic” fits Mormons and Mormonisms well. 🙂
Pingback: In the beginning, god[s]… « The Hiddenness of Blog
Falcon,
Number three above: Show them that the Bible is clearly and absolutely monotheistic–can only work if we shared the same premise regarding the Bible, which is that it is the inerrant Word of God. I have often maintained and still state that the reason Mormonismm goes everywhere is because the biblical text is not authoritative for their lives. Their source of authority are their leaders and their personal testimony. They measure nothing against the Bible. It is important to understand that Mormons believe they are walking around in true light while we muddle through in the darkness. I remember being taught that the Bible was written for the Church and not for those outside of her, which is why they believe Christians don’t know the Bible from the proper perspective which, of course, is from the perspective of ongoing revelation that commenced with JS. Coming to the conviction that the Bible is authoritative for my life–and that God is ABLE to preserve His Word–was another big step in my journey from Mormonism to Christianity. In our quest to understand the Mormon “mindset,” please keep in my that they have been deceived, and are in the boiling waters of idolatry without knowing it.
Peace…
Maybe ‘trilatry’ – worship of 3 gods without excluding belief in others?
Mormons are monolatristic henotheists.
Very good jack. I am enjoying your posts. There’s a perspective there that never-been-lds don’t have. In “Essential Christianity” Dr. Walter Martin lists the areas that cults and heretical groups always attack in order to undermine the Gospel message of Jesus Christ. Knowing these has served me well as I do the mental check-off list of religious groups. The first item on the list is “the Bible is the Word of God”. What someone thinks about God’s Word will shape their entire theology whether it has to do with the nature of God or any of the other basic principles of the Christian faith.
The prophet-wolf Joseph Smith had to degrade the Bible in order to sell his program. Once he was able to do that it was a total free flow of consciousness on his part in coming up with any whack-a-do idea he wanted to test on the people who accepted him as having some new truth. Having a proper respect for and understanding of the Bible, shuts Smith’s religion down in an instant. However, believing in Smith, will take folks on a nefarious spiritual journey from which many don’t escape. There’s something in Mormonism however, that causes it to have difficulty maintaining the membership. I would say that at the heart of it, people sense that Mormonism has a view of God that is in opposition to the God of the universe.
Falcon,
I have been amazed by how many former LDS there are, and it does indeed seem to be growing. I currently work with a woman who got out of Mormonism two years ago. Yes, there is something about the teachings of Mormonism that causes LDS to have some sort of lingering doubt–a doubt they fight against throughout their lives whatever it may be (why else the hyberbolic expressions when bearing their testimonies). This is evidence of the Work of the Holy Spirit and the power of Jesus Christ to call lost souls to Himself. The Holy Spirit is working right now even as we type in defense of biblical Christianity. He is convicting lost souls of the false teachings of Mormonism.
Sometimes, we as humans think of repentance solely in terms of behavior. However, Peter’s Christo-centric sermon to “God-fearing Jews” in Acts 2 went right to the heart of their false beliefs about Jesus. This is the context to their question: “Brothers, what shall we do?” Peter says: “Repent, and be baptized everyone of you.” They had to turn away from their fallacious thinking and arguments they had about Jesus Christ. Understanding Who Jesus Christ is is vital in having true relationship with Him. That is why Jesus asked His disciples, “Who do you say that I am?” Peter’s response was the correct response, as he clearly understood what it meant to call Jesus “Messiah.” When Mormons are asked who they say that Jesus is, the responses are synchristic, and synchretism is nothing more than false religion and idolatry mixed with truth. Ultimately, their response to Jesus’ question can be boiled down to “the guy who made it possible for me to save myself through my own works.” That is not the meaning of “Messiah.”
(I hope we leave the “be baptized” clause to another discussion. 🙂 )
Peace…
2 Ne. 31:21 “And now, behold, this is the doctrine of Christ, and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is one God, without end. Amen.”
the last line of “The Testimony of the Three Witnesses” near the front of the Book of Mormon:
“And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.”
Doctrine & Covenants 20:28 “Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal, without end. Amen.”
Sharon
thank you, i hope my pleading for this was inspiration for, finally, a topic that has some substance to it!
i may need a moment to stretch and warm-up, i sense this discussion will intensely ‘semantic’.
…and for the record, a graven “cross” around thy neck is idolatry.
falcon and jack
should we all leave so you can have a more private conversation?
setfree
now it seems you are coming to a true understanding of the nature of God. Do you now see why we specifically use the term “Our Heavenly Father”?
Let us not forget our tried and true friend “context” when we look for true meanings of the word “God”…..and “unity”.
in accordance with brevity…
Henotheism is the most aptly sized box, if one were to try and cram mormon theology thusly.
quite literaly monotheism is not a scriptural requisite of any significance (especially those that sternly contend that the Law is merely a trick)…mono-worship is significant, but not mono-believe.
John 14:3
1 John 3:2
i would be curious to what Divine purpose the Ev believes our life is for….why did God place us here?…does He have any aspirations for us?, His children.
subgenius,
uh, what?
are you saying that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit IS ONE GOD somehow accurately represents what Mormons are taught to believe, their current doctrine, or anything close? are you saying somehow that “the context” of those passages helps a person understand how three beings who are “ONE GOD” can become three gods?
No, my friend. You are either snowed or snowing. This is only demonstrating Joseph Smith’s transition from monotheism to whatever else he felt like thinking.
Deut 10:17
1 Cor 8:6
setfree
as our article of faith proclaims our belief that God has yet to reveal everything, when He does it does not render what was before contrary…but man can mistake what once was….just as men mistake what is.
so, it seems that you may be courting modalism, which is not the mormon way. Not surprising would be the assertion that JS might portray his “inspired” work in a modalistic manner, especially given the “context” ot his times.(again consider context)
Consider the orthodox trinitarian view, where the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are 3 distinct ‘persons’ each equal and eternal, each God.
Wha? how is that possible you say? As a man i must comprehend all things, right?
As many have said before, One in love, in purpose, but not in Being.
3 Nephi is full of ‘clarifications’ that your references are not to be considered modalistic….as well as Matthew 3:13-17 or John 14:28 or John 15:10, etc..
bottom line, the Bible clearly teaches plural gods, yet demands worship of One God.
Sub,
God placed us here for . . . to worship God and to enjoy Him is our chief end. God’s chief end is to glorify Himself.
“mono-worship is significant, but not mono-believe”
I do not think you can separate the two (Jn 4:24). The charge that Mormons have a different God is not a parlor trick. It is a genuine belief Christians have, it is Biblical, and it is shared by some LDS leaders. “Ev’s” maintain the creator-creation distinction that has existed since the first century. Our God is of a different woop-and-wharf, a different kind, than you or me or any god. In the OT the other Gods worship El-Elyon. They may be gods but they are not like Him; He is unique.
Mere intellectual ascent is not sufficient for true worship of God but it is necessary. Without the belief that God is one, a person is not “do[ing] well”; on this one even the demons exceed Mormonism in mere theological correctness (James 2:19).
subgenius,
Why did God place us here?
For His glory (1 Corinthians 10:31; Romans 11:36) and so that we could enjoy Him forever (Psalm 73:24-26; John 17:22, 24).
Which begs the question: Which of the three LDS Gods (for this world) are Mormons required to worship?
What are we to make of those (like President Hinckley) who worshiped more than one?
gundeck,
Isn’t it surprising how, without any collusion, two Christians rather quickly answered sub’s question in almost identical words. No malice, no hedging, just a straight, Bible-based answer.
Sub,
“the Bible clearly teaches plural gods”
I understand this is your position but you have got to do more than restate it for us to buy into it. If it was so clear why do we see worshipers of El-Elyon in the first century (both B.C. and A.D.) coming to a 180 degree conclusion from the scriptures? Was that a product of the Great Apostasy too? Was Israel, and thus the church, in total apostasy by the time Christ incarnated (even before the apostles were called let alone died)?
I have never on this site denied our belief that there are in existence other Gods, but I have disagreed with being placed as polytheists as that connotes worshiping all of them as well – kind of like you don’t like being referred to as the ‘A-word’. Henotheism- or Monolatry are better.
I like this quote which explains who we worship “By definition, God (generally meaning the Father) is the one supreme and absolute Being; the ultimate source of the universe; the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good Creator, Ruler, and Preserver of all things” (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 317).
Setfree,
I don’t know if you got the email I sent a few days ago. If you did then you would have the answer to your question. If you didn’t then here are a couple of the quotes I sent that does answer your question –
“There is a oneness in the Godhead as well as a distinctness of personality. This oneness is emphasized in the sayings and writings of prophets and apostles in order to guard against the erroneous idea that these three may be distinct and independent deities and rivals for our worship” (Joseph F. Smith, “Answers to Questions,” Improvement Era, Jan. 1901, 228).
“Three glorified, exalted, and perfected personages comprise the Godhead or supreme presidency of the universe. . . . They are: God the Father; God the Son; God the Holy Ghost. . . . “Though each God in the Godhead is a personage, separate and distinct from each of the others, yet they are ‘one God’ . . . , meaning that they are united as one in the attributes of perfection. For instance, each has the fulness of truth, knowledge, charity, power, justice, judgment, mercy, and faith. Accordingly they all think, act, speak, and are alike in all things; and yet they are three separate and distinct entities. Each occupies space and is and can be in but one place at one time, but each has power and influence that is everywhere present” (McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 319).
Ralph,
Was that McConkie’s opinion? I am pretty sure it is because when I see non-Mormons quoting from Mormon Doctrine we are quickly rebuffed that your dear apostle’s book is “not scripture”.
I state this for a couple reasons and not just to come off as smarmy. Mormons are far from consistent on what constitutes scripture. Second, I could pull out several contrary quotes from men who equal, or surpass, McConkie in terms of rank. God’s God surpasses Adonai in the ways that Bruce mentions.
What’s it like to worship a “monotheistic” God, while that God is worshiping another “monotheistic” God above him, and while you’re being simultaneously prayed to and worshiped by 40 billion spirit children who consider you their “monotheistic” God?
Ralph,
I apologize for not getting back to you about that yet. I am meaning to print it out, and comb through it, before i reply to it.
However, to be clear:
Christians speak of 3 beings who are one God. There is just One God. Total. That’s it. This, by the way, is also what the BIble gives (contrary to subs verses, which are easily refuted, and have been – even by me- before on this site)
The Bible says ONE GOD. PERIOD.
You have given some quotes by various people, and basically what I see you saying is that
One God Equals Three Gods.
What’s more, you’re asserting that three men can “grow up” into gods, right? So these were, at least, three distinct people. Though “God” never changes, these three distinct people “grew up” into three gods, but you can just say they are “one god” cuz they’re so similar. Except they’re not. Cuz one didn’t have a body. And one had all of us spirit kids…
Oh, yeah, and then there’s that. There’s the fact that the Bible verses that the Mormons have picked out as being specifically about Elohim are actually about Jehovah… meaning, the ones where it says that God is the father of the spirits, and the one where it says He is the Most High. These are supposed to be (according to Mormonism) about Elohim, but they are really about Jehovah.
So… my conclusion:
Nice quotes, but…. seriously, can you really unravel all this mess in your head? I certainly cannot.
Right?
So my question again to you is, does this actually make sense to you?
I feel you Aaron. I must say our current God and dad seems a bit arrogant or even conceited compared to his brother-gods. All the statements in the Bible about how he is better than his siblings and cousins probably did not go over well at the council of the gods. But then again maybe his book was a reply to his jerk of a big-brother-god who boasted about how he was better than little ol’ Yaweh.
I especially liked this part “Each occupies space and is and can be in but one place at one time, but each has power and influence that is everywhere present”
Wow. No wonder you guys think you’ll make it to heaven. Your god (which ever one he is of the three gods) can only see so much. right? and hear so much. He’s probably over in Florida right now, so whatever we are doin today will go unnoticed. let’s live it up!
jack,
Again, outstanding work here. Our poor Mormon poster is having a real problem dealing with exMormons who have an effective witness for Jesus Christ and have rejected Mormonism. I always know when we are hitting the ball solidly. Keep-up the good work. I value your knowledge and friendship.
Hay Ralph at least you’re up front about the fact that Mormonism acknowledges more than one god. That does make Mormonism polytheistic regardless of how many gods you worship. Can I give you the Orson Pratt quote again? You know the one where he says that if you worship one of the gods you worship all of them. Now regardless of whether or not BY bought that concept or not, Pratt said it and we’ve learned that Mormon leaders/prophets/GAs are right sometimes and wrong other times but they are all right some of the time, that is if you want them to be right. Right? And BTW, these are the guys that are getting all the revelations. Great bunch to follow.
David,
Sometimes it is just to easy.
subgenius,
The problem with henotheism and the Law is that Deut 32:39 (among others) precludes that as a biblical option.
Hi Ralph,
I hope your commitments at work are going well.
Ralph, that statement by Bruce McConkie( Mormon
Doctrine,p.317 ) that you cited describing ” the
God we worship…” was interesting since those
words describe Almighty God. Do you remember a
couple of months ago that you admitted to me that
one day you also hoped to become an Almighty God?
I referenced the worship given to God in
Rev.4:8;19:6 , as what will also be said about
you one day when your eternal progression to God-
hood is attained . At that time I thanked you for
being forthright about your Mormon belief.
In my opinion, this is not the gospel.Rather it
is the interpretation of the scriptures by end-
times(latter-day) prophets. LDS prophets have
said that there is safety in their counsel, and
truth in their interpretation of God’s Word.
Sincere, honest LDS need to look afresh at Jesus’ counsel at Matt.7:15,24:24,25.
Thank you Jesus.
Ralph, I will not stop praying for you.
The denial of Mormons that they are not polytheists is simply a falsehood. It is the belief in or worship of many gods.
Young taught it:
“…He [God]is a being of he same species as ourselves; He lives as we do, except the difference that we are earthly, and He is heavenly. He has been earthly, and is of precisely the same species of being that we are. Whether Adam is the personage that we should consider our Heavenly Father, or not is a considerable mystery to many. I do not care for one moment how that is; it is no matter whether we are to consider HIM OUR GOD, OR WHETHER HIS FATHER, OR HIS GRANDFATHER, for in either case we are one species – of one family – and Jesus Christ is also of our species.” (Discourse, Feb. 8th, 1857 JD 4:215-219)
A hierarchy of gods: (Adam-god’s father):
“How has it transpired that theological truth is thus so widely disseminated. It is because God was once known on the earth among his children of mankind, as we know one another. Adam was as conversant with his father who placed him upon this earth as we are with our earthly parents. The father frequently came to visit his son Adam, and talked and walked with him; and the children of Adam were more or less acquainted with their Grandfather, and their children were more or less acquainted with their Great-Grandfather…” (JD 9:148)
To be ‘exalted with the Gods’ Young taught:
“Elders, never love your wives one hair’s breadth further than they adorn the Gospel, never love them so but that you can leave them at a moment’s warning without shedding a tear. Should you love a child any more than this? No. Here are Apostles and Prophets who are destined to be exalted with the Gods, to become rulers in the kingdoms of our Father, to become equal with the Father and the Son, and will you let your affections be unduly placed on anything this side that kingdom and glory? If you do, you disgrace your calling and Priesthood.” (JD 3:360)
The primary thing that I do when someone wants to know the basics of Mormonism is stick to the Mormon teaching on the plurality of gods and eternal progression. That one point about Mormonism serves to inoculate people against the sweetness and light presentation that a person would get from the Mormon missionaries. The nature of God doctrine in Mormonism is a real turn-off to the average person and that’s why Mormons don’t lead with it.
Mormons want to flatter themselves with the notion that this is a “deep” spiritual truth and only really spiritually deep people can grasp it and accept it by faith. This is the same hocus pocus Joseph Smith pulled on his followers to get them to accept plural wifery. The implication of course is that someone who doesn’t accept these super deep spiritual concepts is really not spiritually up to snuff. We get spiritual exclusivity here that is well practiced by the cults.
To repeat an earlier observation, the more repulsive and off the wall a teaching is, the more the cultist likes it and clings to it.
not to offend the democrats or anything, but i see similarities between how Mormons see their religion, and how Americans saw our current president, before he was elected. Everyone sees/saw what they want(ed) to see. The church, like the president, says a lot on every side, and by doing so, seeks to conceal the bottom line truth of all they stand for. No upfront, straight forward answers. No definites. A lot of what people want to hear, a lot spoken on both sides of many issues, to pretend agreement with your personal preferences and beliefs.
Elohim is plural. That is a fact.
All Christians believe in polytheism if they believe the Bible.
“Elohim is plural”
I was wondering when this argument was going to appear. I am surprised it took so long. In the Tenach, where Elohim is used, the pronouns and verbs are generally masculine and singular. “Elohim” is translated many different ways. It can mean gods, God, goddess, angels, mighty, or judges. Moses is even called “Elohim” at one point.
The Bible uses “Elohim” in a wide variety of ways. To use the word by itself to “prove” some kind of plurality in the Godhead (even the doctrine of the Trinity) is merely to see in the word something that someone wants to see. The word is much more generic than that.
If the Bible so clearly teaches plural gods, gods on par with Yaweh, then why did native Greek and Hebrew speakers (in the first century before and after Christ) go in the opposite direction and affirm monotheism?
Gundeck wrote
Amen. End of story.
I mean, if there were other ‘gods’ higher than the one we’ve been subjected to, then they would be able to “deliver out of” YHWH’s hand.
Some time ago, we had an exchange here when I asked a Mormon what he was going to tell his spirit children when they started to worship him as God. Was he going to “fess up” and acknowledge that there was a “god” higher than him, to whom they should have been directing their worship?
It seems our Heavenly Father is unwilling to acknowledge any “gods” before him, which makes him a liar (if the Mormon doctrine of eternal progression has any truth to it). Perhaps he’s gambling on the fact that his heavenly father won’t get to hear about it?
Did anyone see one of my points above?
Polytheism these days has the connotation of WORSHIPPING more than one God, not just believing that there is more than one God in existence. It’s similar to how you Evs don’t like to be called by the A-Mormon word because of how the meaning these days seems to be more negative in connotation. That is why we don’t like to be named polytheists. Mutual respect would then ask that you stop using polytheist as we have stopped with the ‘A-word’.
We worship only one God – Heavenly Father, and we believe that He is the ONLY SUPREME Being for this world and all the creations around it (ie this universe). There is no other God that has anything at all to do with this sphere of creation. That is how God can say in Isaiah that He knows of no other Gods, because He has no influence in their creations and they have no influence in His. I have said many times before, it’s like children – they have only one biological father, no more, regardless of how many fathers there are in the world. I know of no other fathers for my children before me, nor any after me. That does no preclude the existence of any other fathers does it?
Setfree,
When a husband and wife are termed ‘one’, is this a literal meaning? No matter how intimate they get they are still 2 people. That is how I interpret the Bible with the verses you use for the Trinity.
Ralph,
Your rationalizing is showing.Your use of
analogies to prove your doctrine of God is’nt
working. You said that there is only One God
you worship, that being Heavenly Father, but
then you go ahead and use verses from Isaiah
to show this.Yet that verse you cited is
God the Son (Jesus) speaking!
Ralph, I wish you could truely experience the
truth of worshipping Jesus, it brings His
Father glory to do so.Perhaps when you see the
truth of Jesus being more than just your spirit
brother who happened to climb the ladder up to
Godhood before you do, that you’ll fall at His
feet and worship Him for who He is, the very
omnipotent Creator that Isaiah clearly worships.
Ralph argued for Henotheism by commenting
Ralph,
Are you saying that they (the Gods) don’t even talk to each other?
The most generous interpretation I can read in your position is that you’re saying that there’s a kind of “United States of Gods” in which the various Gods operate in their respective spheres autonomously, but cooperatively. The question that immediately comes to my mind is “how do you know they cooperate?”
Perhaps they are all submitted to a common ideology, or understanding, or to a common set of principles and ordinances. The trouble with this concept is that a “God” who is submitted to ANYTHING other than Himself is not “God” at all. This is the basis of the argument that the author puts forward in Hebrews 6:13-16
So, the “God” you describe is not “God” at all. Rather, the “thing” that this “God” is submitted to is the true “God”. Why worship a “God” who is controlled by something that’s beyond his power to change?
Also you refer to Isaiah 43 and 45. The God that Isaiah refers to defiantly refuses to acknowledge the existence of any other Gods. So, it looks like Isaiah’s “God” is exaggerating his influence and/or he is declaring war on the other “Gods”. So much for the notion that these “Gods” cooperate.
If you jettison the mess that Mormonism has made of this issue, it actually becomes really very simple. There is One God. He was there before everything else. Everything else derives its being from Him. He is the One we worship. He never changes. He is not subject to anything else. He dwelt among us for a while, so that we could behold Him as He truly is (John 1:1-14)
Mike R
I really like your posts, but the formatting is difficult to read (it appears all collimated to me). Is there something you could do with your browser?
Ralph,
A polytheist need not worship other gods in order to be a polytheist. Yes, the word can or does carry the connotation of worship, but I think most here know (and you have made your voice heard) that you only worship one god.
However, I believe there is a bit of merit in using the word “polytheist” when there is not for using he Mormon “A-word”. The A-word is meant to close down discussion and is used merely as a slander. The A-word could be considered correct, or true, but if that is the case then so are the terms anti-Christian, anti-Protestant, etc. The use of the word “polytheism”, at least here, is being used in an attempt to open discussion and nail jello to wall as it were.
With that all stated, I am not so sure Mormons do worship just the Heavenly Father. At the ward level, I have seen that many Mormons do in fact worship the Son and the Holy Ghost. Even if the Mormons that are doing so are doctrinally out of line, it is still going on with great frequency. Also, as mentioned in this post, their are Mormon leaders (going all the way up to the First Presidency) that have this belief and have disseminated it.
Lastly, Mormons add themselves to the worship mix as it should be the goal of every Mormon (at last the males) to become a god and be worshiped just his Heavenly Father is worshiped.
falcon commented on the Mormon doctrine of plurality of gods
falcon,
From some of the posts here, it seems that a lot of rank-and-file Mormons are uncomfortable with the doctrine. They minimize it, or ameliorate it, mitigate it or rationalize it.
Of course, the record shows that this is a central issue in the corpus of Mormonism’s “continuing revelation”, and there can be no doubt that Joseph Smith and his close associates considered themselves to be on the highway to deity.
So, this presents a problem. Do we address the Mormonism of the rank-and-file (technically, the “Preparatory Gospel”), or do we address the Mormonism of the Mormon prophets (technically, the “Full Gospel”)?
Also, the True Believing Mormons tend to play “Hide and Seek”. When confronted with something from scripture that opposes their beliefs, they jump over to continuing revelation. However, confront them with something from the continuing revelation that opposes their beliefs, they jump back to scripture. Its like trying to nail jelly (you call it jello?) to the ceiling.
I say, keep on posting the quotes from the Mormon leadership in full, and keep reminding us that these guys thought that they were making it clear and plain.
The fact that they could not agree with each other internally, and their “restored” Gospel looks like everything other than the Gospel that was believed and taught by First Century Christians (as reliably recorded in the Word of God) might just give the rank-and-file the bellyful that they need to jettison the entire enterprise.
However, as I have commented previously, its not enough to persuade people of the falsehoods in Mormonism if they do not come to rely on the truth in Christ.
Ralph,
You don’t want to be known as a polytheist so we should stop saying Mormons are (polytheists)? It hurts your feelings or it doesn’t accurately reflect the reality of Mormonism, or what? Here’s the deal Ralph, if you acknowledge that there are many gods in the universe, you are a polytheist. The idea, of course, is that Mormons want to be known as monotheists because it’s more palatable to the people they are trying to seduce into the sect.
In the past when we have discussed this subject, I’ve suggested that Mormons find themselves an orthodox Jew and give them the Mormon men progressing to gods and there being many gods in the universe and see if they agree with you. But I guess that the Jews are all apart of that great conspiracy that served to omit Mormonism from the Scriptures and history. Mormons are living in a parallel universe. There’s no doubt about it.
In the movie “Ben Hur”, one of the Arabs says to Ben Hur, “One God I can understand, but ONE WIFE.” The Scripture and history of the Jews and Christianity is not kind to what the Mormons want to claim as truth.
Ralph,
You are so very wrong. Read what your prophets say, especially Brigham Young. He taught that Michael(Adam), Eloheam (the grandfather god), (elohim is a title and applies to all of them) and Jehovah created the world. The Eloheam character being Adam’s Father and Jehovahs grandfather. They had a council and the ‘grandfather’ god appointed Michael to go to earth, take one of his wives, partake of the gross matter of this world and become mortal and then populate the earth, giving the ‘spirit children’ he already had earthly bodies.
As I already quoted, Young did not care WHO he worshipped, implying that all LDS should not because all the ‘gods’ are relatives. At the end of it all, Adam was ‘translated’ back into heaven, in time to come down and have sex with Mary, who was also one of his ‘wives’.
The prophets are vague about names, ‘Heavenly Father’ also being a generic title like elohim to the mormon prophets. They do have ‘much to do’ with more than one god, and Young said it did matter who they worshipped, they were the same species.
Mormons ARE polytheists no matter how distasteful it may be to you, they strongly believe in other gods, no matter how much it is watered down by todays ‘prophets’. I recently got a packet of materials about early mormonism, including diary’s, and tho (as I am aware) not binding on the church as a whole (a huge loophole) these things were taught and believed by a large number of LDS. Read John Nuttal’s diary for an eye opener on just WHAT was going on in your church in Brigham Young’s day.
These doctrines were classified ‘mysteries’ and though later prophets told the membership not to pursue them, Young claimed it all as ‘revelation’ and it is backed up by many many members including later prophets of the church.
As David John Buerger quoted at the end of his Adam-God paper, ‘Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored’ – Aldous Huxley
The whole structure of smith’s ‘hierarchy of gods’ is polytheism.
grindael,
You nailed it! The Mormonism of Smith and Young and all of the early Mormon leaders is something that modern day Mormons don’t want to own. That is why their were groups of Mormons who dumped the “progressive” thoughts of these guys and returned to a more traditional view of the nature of God-among other things.
I have a handy little chart here comparing the basic doctrines of the RLDS, the Temple Lot, and the Salt Lake City Mormons. The RLDS (now Community of Christ) and Temple Lot folks repudiate most of what the SLC bunch believes particularly the polytheism and the eternal progression doctrines. Smith and Young and their subsequent followers were theological train wrecks. They got so impressed with personal revelation that they couldn’t abide by what the Scriptures actually taught.
Yes, I would agree. Keep posting what these guys said. The SLC bunch don’t want to hear it. They want a different brand of Mormonism from what was taught by those whom they follow. This is what cognitive dissonance is all about. Ralph and the rest continually try to massage and mold a more acceptable version of what their leaders have actually taught.
Ralph,
A married man and woman are two persons, but only one “couple” or one “flesh” or one “married unit”.
I would never say that a married man and woman were the same person, would you?
Nor would I ever say that three gods were one GOD.
gpark
polytheism is surely applicable to Mormons, however, it is more appropriate to apply henotheism. Though henotheists are polytheists, henotheism is a more accurate and honest definition.
i would also like to take a moment and say that my above prophecy about the intensity of “semantics” here is emerging to be true.
Now on the subject at hand, there is an interesting qualifier not mentioned…what does it mean to be in the presence of God?
more specifically, one must have a convincing argument of God’s plural grammar:
Genesis 1:26
everyone must understand that early christians were primarily unaware of any plural notions, or even the trinity. The OT was left un-inspected by christians until Paul and Acts 17:11 ….then the discovery was made…..God associated with personal pronouns like “We” “Us” and “Our”.
Genesis 1:26 has far reaching impacts on the true nature of God and the Godhead.
“Us” made…”Our” image….is it the idea here that God is carrying on a conversation with himself? (why? for deception to the reader? for jokes?)
If God is absolutely singular and unique then why would He speak in plural?
it surely was not angels He was speaking to, they had no part in our creation and we are not in their image. the angels argument is hardly worth mentioning. Plus God never uses plural pronouns when talking to angels.
But we know Jesus was not an angel – Hebrews 1:5
but read John 1:2-3…the begining?
Yes, Jesus was with God in the begining, and it is not unreasonable to assume that the Holy Spirit was there to. God is not schizophrenic.
Isaiah 6:8
Enter the Godhead
Elohim is in the plural form, so why is it that in Mormonism it is the name of the Father?
Sub,
“If God is absolutely singular and unique then why would He speak in plural”
For someone who likes to talk about misnahs, this is pretty elementary. Hebrew has a “plural intensive” (sometimes referred to in reverse – intensive plural). Sometimes this is called a royal “we” or a reflexive “we”. Throughout the Bible, Elohim is rendered in many different ways. Most often the pronouns and verbs are singular and masculine. Again, this is pressing a word way too far.
The plurality of “we”, “us”, and “Elohim” allows for plurality but it in no way requires it. Again, if Jews who were fluent in Hebrew in the first century before and after the advent did not see polytheism/henotheism in the word “Elohim”, and the pronouns associated with it, then one has to wonder if the great apostasy happened before Christianity got started. Are you really telling us 1st century Jewish, Christians apostasized from polytheism to monotheism?
“Christianity, alone among the world faiths, teaches that God is triune. The doctrine of the Trinity is that God is one being who exists eternally in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Trinity means that God is, in essence, relational.
The gospel writer John describes the Son as living from all eternity in the “bosom of the Father” (John 1:18), an ancient metaphor for love and intimacy. Later in John’s gospel, Jesus, the Son, describes the Spirit as living to “glorify” him (John 16:14). In turn, the Son glorifies the Father (17:4) and the Father, the Son (17:5). This has been going on for all eternity (17:5b)…
Each of the divine persons centers upon the others. None demands that the others revolve around him. Each voluntarily circles the other two, pouring love, delight, and adoration into them. Each person of the Trinity loves, adores, defers to, and rejoices in the others. That creates a dynamic, pulsating dance of joy and love…
The doctrine of the Trinity overloads our mental circuits. Despite its cognitive difficulty, however, this astonishing, dynamic conception of the triune God is bristling with profound, wonderful, life-shaping, world-changing implications”
attribution, Tim Keller
God has always been more than one ‘person’ (for lack of a better word), but just one God.
Angels and humans are God’s creation, thus it was not them that helped with the creation. It was the three parts of God Himself.
Simple question.
How is it that while hanging on the cross in his most hours of greatest need, Christ asked the Father “why has thou forsaken me?”
Sure seems like two distinct beings to me. The Father withdrew His Spirit or influence from Christ, leaving Him alone- meaning separate from the Father. Please explain how this is possible if they are “one” as the EVs describe.
By the way, I think this moment on the cross provides insight into the whole scenerio of Adam partaking of the fruit and why it was necessary for him to go against the Fathers counsel in doing so. It had to be his decision to enter mortality. God did not want to push Adam into this fallen world. So to make it fully Adam’s choice, he had to go against the Fathers command.
How does this relate to Christ being left completely alone on the cross? It was necessary for Christ to overcome sin and death completely on His own, independent of the Father. Just like it was necessary for Adam to choose absolutely for himself to enter mortality.
This is a pretty neat parallel in my opinion.
Anyway, how do EV explain Christ being left alone on the cross?
Man am I sorry that I came to the party so late. So much good stuff here to comment on and rebuke. Whoever it was that pointed out the discrepency LDS allow in affirming or denying non-scriptural literature and quotes only when it suits their cause hit the nail on the head. How many quotes does it take from Sharon, Grindael, etc. to prove that LDS prophets, apostles, apologists, etc. are all over the map with this subject, as well as every other subject that comes up in Mormonism. It’s like a textbook on world religions throughout history threw up and created the LDS church.
There has got to be a standard to fall back on in anything to set things in order and to define error. In law, it’s statutes and procedure, in communication it’s the rules of language and grammar, in religion, it’s the faith’s literature. The problem with Mormon literature is that there is no standard. What was true yesterday is not true today, and what is true today will not be true tomorrow. A prophet or apostle can make up his own interpretation of a scriptural passage, or just make scripture of his own out of whole cloth. The next one, or the one standing next to him, is free to give his own interpretation or creation of scripture. Q-What is the standard of truth? A-Willingness of the hearer to accept the teaching. For Christians, it is the bible alone, and we do debate less-clear areas of doctrine. But the bible clearly teaches that there is but One God. It also teaches that there are three divine persons. It also teaches that the three persons are each coequal and coeternal. Only One God-Three Distinct Persons- each God Himself. The Trinity. That’s the standard of God’s nature according to the Bible. Anything outside of that is heresy. Mormonisms’ view of God is heretical, every one of them…maybe? It depends on who you’re talking to and which day of the week it is.
Ralph, of all of the LDS that post here I find you the most endearing. You are honest about your beliefs, have been honest in the past about discrepencies in LDS teachings when shown clear evidence that the teachings were false; for example that the early church never taught the Trinitarian nature of God. As I have said several times before, and I’ll keep saying it until every member of the LDS church leaves the org. Mormons live the bulk of their lives in reality. They make sound decisions based upon reason and evidence. They exegete literature and communication every day, whether it be a newspaper article, instructions on how to change a tire, bake a cake, or obey their boss when he says, “Ralph, go get me an 8 ounce cup of coffee, no more, no less. I need two sugars and exactly one half ounce of cream. If you bring it back any different, you’re fired.” I’ll bet you’d be a measurin’ fool. If you brought it back to your boss and he said, “Ralph, I specifically told you, ‘bring me a 12 ounce cup of coffee, 4 sugars, and absolutely no cream. YOU’RE FIRED!” You would tell him that he didn’t tell you that, and you may even pull out the paper you wrote his instructions on because it was so important that you got them right, as your job depended on it.
But when it comes to your religious life you throw out the standard that you operate under every day and swallow all of the contradictions hook, line, and sinker. There is another standard that we all operate under every day and it’s known as the standard of “reasonableness”. This standard asks, “Would a reasonable person act, believe, behave etc. in the same manner as another hypothetical person would, if they were placed in the same position, given the same information, etc?” Those who believe in Mormonism fail this standard, miserably. A reasonable person wouldn’t make the mental concessions necessary to believe in the Mormon deity if faced with the overwhelming contradictory evidence under this topic alone.
(cont for Ralph) You have said that you are involved in scientific research. From some of your past posts it is obvious that you are very familiar with cellular biology. I ask you to apply that same reasoning ability that you use when you collect research data to your church. Biblical Christianity can pass those rigorous examinations. It has been attacked for thousands of years, yet it has stood without wavering on its convictions and teachings, even in the face of severe persecution. I can read works by the anti-nicean writers and my beliefs match theirs because we both have the same standard teaching. Your church has been around for less than 200 years and it has consistently wavered and changed doctrine. Just read the statements made by successive prophets and apostles of your church.
It probably won’t help, but I’m praying that it will. Here is an article by another Australian scientist, a former LDS bishop, who left the church based upon reasonable evidence. His name is Simon Southerton. Maybe you have already heard of him. http://www.exmormon.org/whylft125.htm