With Him it’s impossible to exaggerate

“You should have seen it! It will go down as epic in Church ball.”

“I was THERE and it was pedestrian, man.”

“WHAT?! No way. Everyone had the jaw on the ground!”

“You’re full of exaggerations today.”

“If there’s anything that can’t be exaggerated, it’s what happened on the court.”

“Yeah, right. You can exaggerate all the time about your game. But you can’t exaggerate the nature of God.”

“Whoa, big change of subject. You trying to get heavy on me again?”

“Well your head is big right now, it can fit big ideas, can’t it?”

“Hah. Okay, shoot.”

“Well, to exaggerate is to talk it up bigger than it is, right?”


“Well, it’s impossible to do that with God. There isn’t anything even imaginably better.”

“You mean better for us, right?”

“No, I mean for anyone, anywhere.”

“Well then why do we care?”

“Because it’s awesome. Listen, what’s better, to have sinned, or to have never sinned at all?”

“To have never sinned.”

“What’s more moral than never having sinned?”

“I don’t know.”

“Mmm hmm. OK, so what’s better, to know everything or to know only something?”

“To know everything.”

“Can you have a greater knowledge than the knowledge of everything?”


“Mmm hmm. Ok, better to have all power, or to have only some power?”


“Can you have greater power than all power?”

“No. This is stupid, man.”

“That’s my point. It’s obvious that there’s nothing more moral than never having sinned, that there isn’t a greater knowledge than the knowledge of everything, and that there isn’t a greater power than all power.”


“So you can’t exaggerate when there’s nothing left to exaggerate with.”

“And… ?”

“Well, the God of the Bible is called the ‘Most High’. If you said there was a higher God than him, he’d have to be Kinda High, not Most High.”

“Are you bashing my religion, man?”

“Maybe. I mean, I can obviously exaggerate your god.”

“What? How?”

“Well, what if I said that your god never sinned?”

“You’d only be speculating.”

“Mmm hmm. And what if I said your god always knew everything?”

“You’d be wrong. He had to learn to become a god just like all the other gods. But that’s deep man. It doesn’t concern my salvation.”

“And what if I said your god always had all power?”

“You’d be right.”



“Did he create the planet his spirit-grandfather was born on? Wasn’t he in spirit-baby-diapers or something?”

“Oh gosh, you always bring that up. Here we go into bashing mode again.”

“Dude, you know me, I love you bro.”

“Yeah, but I hate it when you disrespect my religion.”

“Well, at least hear me on this. If you tried to disrespect my God by exaggerating him, you couldn’t. You couldn’t even if you tried. And I mean tried hard. It’s not even possible with my God. He is the Un-exaggeratable Most High.”

“Fancy name.”

“But if someone tried to bash your god, they’d have an easy time, because it’s easy to think of a God greater than yours.”


“OK, I’ll stop now. But just think about it, OK?”

“Whatever. I guess.”

“Think about it next time you exaggerate your game. I AM watching the same game, you know!

“But not really. You have to be on court to get the full effect.”

“Mmm hmm!”

This entry was posted in Nature of God and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

166 Responses to With Him it’s impossible to exaggerate

  1. liv4jc says:

    Ralph, there is much more evidence of the Trinity than those verses you quoted. John 1:1 is not even in and of itself a Trinitarian verse. It only lays the foundation for John’s gospel, which throughout clearly identifies Jesus as God (I AM). Take a look at Genesis 3:2-9. It is the Angel of Jehovah that appears in the burning bush. The Angel speaks as God in verse 4, then is referred to again as Jehovah speaking in verse 7-9.
    In Psalm 110 we have Jehovah (who you believe is only Jesus) telling David’s Lord to sit at his right hand while He makes His enemies His footstool. Jesus uses Psalm 110 to identify Himself in Matthew 22:44, Mark 12:36, and Luke 20:42 as the Lord that is spoken of by Jehovah, as Jehovah is speaking of the Messiah. It is the LDS who have to reconcile Jesus calling himself the Messiah if he is the only person identified as Jehovah in the OT. In Acts 2:34-36 Peter identifies Jesus again as the Lord who was spoken of by God (Jehovah), and in verse 36 says that God has made Jesus both Lord and Christ (Messiah). In Acts 2:39 Peter calls Jesus the “Lord our God”. In Philippians 2:6-11 Jesus is referred to as being in the form of God, equal with God and highly exalted by God. And it is said that at His name every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father. This is a quote from Isaiah 45:23 which speaks specifically of Jehovah who declares that there is no God but Him. This fits perfectly with Jesus statements in John, especially John 8:58 where Jesus declares Himself to also be the I Am of Isaiah 43:10 and Exodus 3:4. So you see, God the Father is Jehovah, and Jesus is Jehovah. The Holy Spirit is also declared to be God in Matthew 2:20, Luke 1:35 where He is called the Most High, and in Matthew 12:31 Jesus declares that a person can blaspheme against the Holy Spirit, so He must also be God. And in Acts 5:3-4 we learn that lying to the Holy Spirit is lying to God. 3 Persons, 1 God.

  2. Janet wrote

    Just having the knowledge that the Gospel of Jesus Christ has been restored to the earth again is very securing to me.

    Janet’s reaction demonstrates the One Central Truth of Mormonism, which is that the (SLC) Mormon Church is the One True Church. Every other truth is subordinate to this One Central Truth.

    For example, the LDS prophets could say to Janet that she is, actually, a blue-ringed octopus. Janet would then react by saying “I don’t think I am a blue-ringed octopus. I don’t understand it and I can’t rationalize it, but it must be true because the Mormon Church is true”.

    What I mean is that it does not matter what you believe, as long as you believe that the Church is true. As Janet says, she gets a lot of self-affirmation out of that. And why not? Their church makes them different from everyone else.

    Even the teachings of their prophets become subordinate truths to the One Central Truth. So, it does not matter that Brigham Young taught Adam-God doctrine, and Bruce McConkie later un-taught it. They are both Mormons, and the thing that unites them is their personal subordination to the One Central Truth.

    Others have noted here that, in the Mormon Church, you can believe anything you like but you can’t teach it. Given the serpentine nature of Mormon history, it seems that you can believe anything you like and teach it, just as long as you subscribe to the One Central Truth.

    By contrast, the Biblical perspective holds forth a singular, central truth, which subordinates all other truths and unites the people of God. It is Christ Himself, who created all things and for whom and in whom all things have their being (Rev 4:11). He is light, and in Him there is no darkness at all (1 John 1:5). He is THE truth (John 14:6).

    When I see Mormons replace the One Central Truth of God, with the One Central Truth of their “church”, I see the cult-like nature of Mormonism committing an ultimate blasphemy.

  3. falcon says:

    Once again you have put together enough related quotes to bury any contrary arguments that the Mormon posters might put forth. It’s not even a question of context or interpretation with these quotes because your presentation clearly shows the disjointed nature of Mormon beliefs and progressive prophetic revelation.
    Martin hit the nail on the head by saying the one basic tenet of SLC/LDS is that the (LDS) church is true. There doesn’t even have to be an explanation for the disparity of proclamation among the prophets and GAs; in the mind of the Mormon. When explanations are tried, as we can see on this thread, the convoluted train of thought is apparent.
    That’s why I think that Mormons get the mistaken impression that they are deeply spiritual and have privileged insights into these contradictory revealed truths…..they’ve simply become comfortable with LDS doctrinal ambiguity.
    Within Christianity we have folks that put forth all sorts of opinions on different matters but we don’t claim that any of them have a corner on the truth or are even hearing directly from God. We have God’s revelation. It is complete. Jude said it when he wrote that the Gospel has once and for all been delivered. The Book of Revelation delivers a warning to anyone thinking about adding to “the words of the prophecy of this book”.
    The problem with these Mormon prophets is that they began believing their own press and became intoxicated with the thought of speaking forth the mind of God.

  4. falcon says:

    My guess is that there are few if any religions that don’t claim some sort of revelatory or prophetic tradition. My guess is also that these prophetic “words” are thought by those practicing the religion to be the “true”, “right” and the revealed mind of God.
    There is a prophetic tradition within Christianity that was high-jacked by Mormonism. Through out the OT and NT “prophets” receive the Word of the Lord. In the modern Christian Pentecostal movement, prophetic utterances and a “Word form the Lord” are part-and-parcel of the Charismatic experience. The gifts of the Holy Spirit and instructions for there use are outlined specifically in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians chapters 12, 13 and 14. The five fold ministry of the Holy Spirit are named in Ephesians 4:11.
    Some within the Christian tradition deal with these matters by saying at the close of the cannon of Scripture and with the death of the apostles, all of this stopped. Others disagree. Interestingly enough, many mainline churches are not in the cessationists camp.
    Now why do I ramble on here. Simply to make the point that when I read the “prophetic” words of the Mormon “prophets” it’s plain to me that these guys are blowing smoke. Believe me, anyone could spout the stuff that’s coming out of their mouths. The dangerous thing with these guys is that they actually believed they were/are hearing from God and others believed it too. If this were just some isolated plebe speaking forth, no big deal. But when the lives and eternal destiny of large numbers of people are at stake, it is dangerous.

  5. setfree says:

    Ralph, before we communicate much longer, I think we ought to become better acquainted. My name is Joe (well, that’s the short version). I’m an only child. I work with the poor. I have brown hair and fair skin.

  6. setfree says:

    I guess I could give you a little more info than that.
    Joe is short for Josephine. I’m an only child because I had 2 brothers and 1 sister that were all stillborn.
    I’m a lawyer and I do a lot of pro bono work.
    My hair is long and dark brown, and I tan well, but my skin is light because I am afraid of skin cancer, so I never tan anymore.

  7. setfree says:


    I think I should tell you more about myself.

    My name is Sid. I have 3 brothers and 5 sisters, and we all get together pretty regularly. I am a janitor at the local movie theater. I have auburn hair, and people say if it weren’t for that, I’d look a lot like Hugh Jackman.

    I do have light skin because I can’t tan. I just burn, which I really hate.

  8. setfree says:

    (Sorry in advance for taking liberties here to prove a point).

    Hi there.

    You call me “God”. And I am God (Elohim). My name is YHWH (Jehovah). I am the only real God. Many people worship things that they believe are “gods”. They’re not. I’m the only one.

    Hi again.

    I am not like you, you need to know this. I exist outside of time and space, as I created both of these things. I am bigger than your imagination. I exist as three persons: you are unable to understand, but for my own reasons, I will call the three persons the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. You will be able to see more of what I am like when “the Son” comes to earth to die in your place. “The Son”‘s name will be Jesus (which means “YHWH becomes Salvation”). He will allow Himself to be killed to reconcile you to me.

    Hi again everyone.

    Actually my name is Elohim, and I was once just like you. Jehovah is just like me, another god, only he is lesser because he’s my spirit kid. Jehovah and I are just two of the many, many gods that exist. You can become one too, if you adopt some Freemasonic handshakes, don’t laugh loudly, and keep some other rules. It’s not really that I’m all powerful.. I’m just light-years ahead of you in spirituality and learning, so it seems that way to you. Won’t it be great when you are populating your own earth, ruling as God and King? Be good!

  9. Olsen Jim says:


    You really don’t demonstrate in any meaningful way what you are trying to prove.

    In fact, nobody on this thread has said anything to counter the contention that the LDS view of God is far more exalted and lofty than any other.

    We believe God has created infinitely more children and has not only redeemed them from sin, but endured every affliction ever experienced, cumulatively, by all of them. His love and power are great enough to create the means by which we wretched creatures can become like Him. No other system of belief has a more exalted view of God.

    Let’s say for the sake of argument that your claims are correct about our doctrines- that God has not been God forever. Even if that is true, that does not diminish from His greatness, power, or love. The claim that it does diminish Him is arbitrary and unfounded.

    Your God has existed at the same level forever and has created and redeemed one inhabited planet.

    Our God has progressed from some undefined existence (going along with your claim for argument sake) to His existence wherein He has created and redeemed an infinite number of inhabited planets. According to LDS doctrine, the atoning sacrifice of Christ had effects that reached further and more powerfully to infinitely more souls than the EV version. It lifts the souls of men far higher than what you claim is possible

    It is quite arbitrary to claim your God is greater because He has always been the same. If you were buying a car, or a computer, or any other product, would you buy it from the company that had been around longer, but had a mediocre product? Or would you prefer to purchase from the company that made the absolutely greatest product?

    By any measure of greatness, power and love, the LDS God is supreme. There truly can be no greater or more loving God.

  10. liv4jc says:

    OJ, your blasphemy is disgusting.

  11. OJ wrote

    If you were buying a car, or a computer, or any other product, would you buy it from the company that had been around longer, but had a mediocre product? Or would you prefer to purchase from the company that made the absolutely greatest product?

    No problem OJ. I’ve already converted from Windows to Linux (and I drive a Subaru).

    …seriously, I’m finding it really difficult to map your metaphor onto anything that makes any sense in the “my God is better than your God” arena. Are you saying that the Mormon god is better than his heavenly father because he has come up with a better “product”?

    The most generous interpretation of your metaphor is “why deal with the monkey, when you could be dealing with the organ-grinder”. In other words, elevate your appeal up the chain of command.

    My response to this is to agree, absolutely. The problem with the Mormon paradigm is that the “god” you deal with is not the end of the chain of command. He is subject to his heavenly father, and all the principles and ordinances of the gospel. He doesn’t write the rules of the game, he’s just quite good at playing to them.

    You wrote

    By any measure of greatness, power and love, the LDS God is supreme.

    …Not as long as there are other gods who are more supreme than him. And

    There truly can be no greater or more loving God.

    …Not as long as there are other gods who are greater, and arguably more loving, than him.

  12. grindael’s posts, quoting from the quorum of the 12’s early development are fascinating.

    Is it just me, or did others get the impression that the agenda was something like “we’ve received these ‘revelations’ from brothers Joseph and Brigham, so how do we make them work?”

    What happens next is an astonishing amount of theological speculation and experimentation, but not one sincere effort to test the ‘revelations’ against the Word of God (8AoF). Its like the Q12 has a dim collective memory of the Bible and because the ‘revelations’ use similar words (“God”, “Elohim”, “Creation”) they think they are compatible with the Biblical message.

    Is it too much to ask for one of those characters present to actually open up the Bible and say “let’s use this to shed some light on what Brother Joseph and Brother Brigham said”?

  13. Others have posted here that Mormonism is lies upon lies upon lies upon lies.

    Grindael makes a compelling case about the cover-ups, obfuscations and misdirections concerning the early development of Mormonism’s prophetic tradition. These lies are needed to cover over earlier lies, which cover over even earlier lies.

    So, what happens if we trace the lies back? What was the original lie? What was the one lie that made all the other lies necessary?

    The answer, I think, has to lie with Joseph Smith. He claimed to have received revelations from God, whereas he had received nothing of the sort.

    Mormons are still living with the consequences today. The great irony is that despite ALL the so-called revelations of the church, they still cannot see Jesus for whom He is.

    To illustrate this, I challenge Mormons to adequately explain the scenario described in Rev 4:9-11.

    I doubt that they can do it because they cannot see what the Living Creatures and the 24 Elders were looking at.

    What were they looking at? The One who lives for ever and ever, whom created all things and in whom all things have their being; The Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the Name above all Names, who was, and is, and is to come (Rev 1:8, Phil 2:9-11, Rev 4:9-11, Rev 22:12-13).

    How can Mormons worship Him, when they can’t even see Him?

  14. grindael says:


    I give credit to Orson Pratt. He did see the glaring discrepancies. It almost got him dis-fellowshipped & did get him bumped down in seniority. He ultimately won out over Young, but what a lot of crap he probably had to take.

  15. OJ,

    Which one of those inhabited planets are you on? Your god has not created and redeemed an “infinite” number of people and that is according to LDS beliefs. There are other worlds inhabited by people created by other gods.

    Your god did not create the matter for the very throne he sits on. Same goes for the air in his lungs, those lungs themselves, you, and me. He may have fashioned some things, even some great things, and that does make him great but can that compare to a God who spoke the universe into existence? Your god must obey certain rules! Are you really being serious?

  16. falcon says:

    I wonder sometimes if these Mormon false prophets ever had an unspoken thought. Their proclamations and then the backtracking and pseudo-theological meanderings of the the Mormon faithful makes me wonder what keeps this farce together. It’s gullible people that perpetuate something that isn’t even a good myth. Mormonism has been liken to a house of cards that if you pull out one card the whole house falls a part. Mormonism’s house of cards has been sitting in a rubble from its inception.

  17. Mike R says:

    You brought out several pertinent points on the
    subject of the Mormon view of God, and how LDS
    should set their sights higher. You referenced
    Rev.4:9-11. That’s an important scripture to
    note as it reflects the goal of each Mormon male.

    O.J. has a opinion of our Creator that is a subtle
    bias one.He has an vested interest in who he wants
    God to be since Mormon teachings have prompted a
    desire in him to want to become as God is, an
    Almighty God himself.
    When Joseph Smith departed from his original
    teachings ( Lectures on Faith) and succumbed to
    the “vain imaginations”[Rom.1:21] that every man
    can be succeptable to, his “new truth” became
    defined and defended by his prophet successors.
    Today those imaginations find a home in the heart
    of sincere Mormon males who, submissive to their
    Prophets/Apostles teachings ,embrace the desire
    to become a God , an Almighty God, who will one
    day experience heavenly beings singing to them the
    same adoration and worship that is detailed in

  18. jackg says:


    Your god is a created being. Your god did not create out of nothing. You have put your god into a box so you can control him, i.e. your god is subject to laws. Lofty? Hardly. It’s amazing how you perpetrate lies against anyone who reads what you post. You are disengenious BUT there is hope for you in Jesus Christ alone. There’s no hope in JS, OJ. Repent and live!

    Praying for you…

  19. jackg says:


    This doesn’t even make any sense, man: “Again, even if I am wrong by your church I am still ending up in a heavenly hell instead of a hellish hell.”

    Put your faith in the ROCK, Ralph, not the sand of JS.

    Praying for you…

  20. jack,

    You made a mistake. I wrote the above; look at all that Ralph and I have written on the matter. And it does make sense; it is a take on Pascals Wager. Ralph wrote this:

    “Do you fully understand that if you really are wrong and are following a false gospel then when you die you will end up being tossed into the lake of fire apart from Jesus forever?”

    – when Mormonism does not teach this. Ralph responded back with the “anything less than the celestial kingdom is a hell” defense – to which I responded that is not really hell, at least not like ours.

    Mormons do not believe that merely following a false gospel sends one to the lake of fire. Ralph, states that he is being “fascetious” (and I think he was) but the passage he points us to is dead serious – it uses the word “anathema”.

    I think Ralph was trying to cut Rick with his own “sword” (false gospel = hell) and in doing so exposed an inconsistency in his own belief system. The passage he point us to (Gal 1:8-9) does use the same kind of language Rick uses . . .
    But . . . Ralph, and Mormonism in general, fails to fully believe in the source of Rick’s call to turn from a “false gospel”.

  21. setfree says:

    The point I was making had nothing to do with whose god is bigger. Although, I would like to say for your sake, a great deal of seeing your god as bigger, and YOURSELF AS SMALLER might do you a great deal of good. It certainly helped me.

    My point was to “bring home” the whole “milk before meat” idea.

    Perhaps with your brain already used to things like this you didn’t notice, so I’ll explain.

    First I came out and gave some comments about a person named Joe. The next time, I revealed more about this person, by giving more details that COMPLEMENTED THE DETAILS I’D ALREADY GIVEN.

    THe third time, the story was completely different.

    The 4th comment, the one about God, followed the same progression. One set of details. Another set of details that built upon the details of the first, and complemented them. And lastly, a set of details that DISCARDED the first two sets, and presented an entirely new “reality”

    To change from ONE GOD with ONE NAME to many gods, etc, is NOT MILK BEFORE MEAT. IT’S ABSOLUTE CONFUSION.

    Was I Josephine or Sid? Don’t you get it? The stories CANNOT BOTH BE TRUE

  22. jackg says:

    Thanks for the clarification, David. I was a bit confused, which really doesn’t take much. 🙂

  23. Rick B says:

    OJ, You talk about how powerful your god is, yet even though people have pointed out he really is not, here is another point.
    Your LDS teachings are so full of problems it’s really sad, You claim you have prophets that speak for god. If your god is so powerful and loving as you claim, how come he never takes the incentive to speak to the LDS prophets and clear up all these issues that arise, like Adam God or blacks having the priesthood then not having it, or the problems in the Pearl like, One God only verses many Gods creating later, the list of problems goes on and never gets cleared up by your all so powerful and loving god. Thats not power or love, it’s a false god you serve.

    Plus you claim he is so loving, well how come you LDS never model the love of the Savior, you guys are so far from loving it’s not even funny, your only about making recruits, not sharing the gospel in love. Rick b

  24. Olsen Jim says:


    What would you say if LDS claimed blaspheme when the EVs on this site drag our God through the mud and say the most despicable things about Him? That very thing happens on every single thread.

    By the way- in what way did I blaspheme? By saying the LDS view of God is greater than yours? Please point to my blaspheme. If you can show me where I am wrong, do so. I think my representation of your version of God is fair in my comparison. The only traits I mentioned are that He has existed in His current state forever and created and redeemed this earth. Do you believe something different?

    Martin- my comparison is between the LDS God and EV God. The EV God has existed forever in His current state, while the LDS God has progressed (again, for the sake of argument) to his current greatness. But comparing the two right now, who is greater? There is no comparison. The product I spoke of is the total creative and redemptive power and love of the respective gods. Any clearer?

    The LDS doctrine of God does not hold Him subservient or “beneath” any other God. And by the way, we don’t believe He serves universal law either. Do you serve the law, or do you feel subservient to the law that makes it illegal to shoot up crystal meth? Probably not. In the same way, God and universal law are one- I am sure He never, ever feels constrained by natural law.

    You seem to think it important that God can change laws of the universe. Same thing with creating those laws. How would that show greatness? Can a God who changes laws be trusted to keep His word? Pretty hard to have faith in such a being.

    David- I am pretty sure I know our doctrine. But for your edification, consider this verse from the POGP: “And worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten.” Moses 1:33.

  25. Olsen Jim says:

    David (continued..)

    If you want me to use the words “without number” instead of “infinite”- fine- my argument stands.

    And as far as following rules, are you saying your God does not follow rules? Pretty tough to respect and obey a God who does not follow rules and constants.

    You, like others here, point to a limited number of abstract concepts to define your God’s greatness (creation ex nihilo, for example). That is fine. But remember, “God is love.” If that is true, I ask the question again, whose God is greater? No comparison.

    MikeR- so do only LDS males believe our doctrine? That is news to me as well as the majority of members of the church who happen to be female. And I suggest you look into the ancient writings on deification- some of those pesky Jews and early Christians had beliefs pretty close to ours on the topic.

    JackG- what “lies” have I perpetuated against “anyone who reads my posts?” How am I disingenuous? Easy out. What box have I put God into? Ridiculous statement. If you like I can refer you to some ancient Christian statements about God creating the world from pre-existent matter. Creation ex nihilo is a false man-made concept, pulled out of thin-air (pun intended). (Actually, the idea came from the Greeks).

    Setfree- I got your metaphor the first time. But it didn’t work in demonstrating Aaron’s claim in this thread.

    RickB- can you say straw man? I could just as well ask you “RickB- if your God were so powerful, why does He not take care of all the problems, disagreements, and lack of clarity in the EV community?” Hardly deserves a response.

  26. setfree says:

    Jim, will that be the argument you use at the judgment seat? “Setfree’s argument made sense, and pointed out a huge fallacy in my religion, but it didn’t go with the right thread”

  27. Rick B says:

    OJ said

    RickB- can you say straw man? I could just as well ask you “RickB- if your God were so powerful, why does He not take care of all the problems, disagreements, and lack of clarity in the EV community?” Hardly deserves a response.

    My question is not a straw man, now you know you cannot answer my question so you make excuses as to why you will not. I have said this before and will say it again.

    In the case of the LDS doctrine, your prophets say things are Doctrine like Adam God, Your prophets say God spoke to them and told them things, Like Blacks never holding the priesthood.

    Your leaders claim things are true but dont say “Thus saith the lord” But then go onto say, we do not need to say, “Thus saith the lord” so if your prophets teach any of these things and call them doctrine, you guys dont like them you blow it off, but if you like them yet they cannot be supported by scripture then you guys say, well our prophet does not need to say thus saith the lord.

    But with us Christians if a pastor teaches something that goes against scripture we/I if at all possible will confront them or do my best to tell people that is a liar and wolf. If your simply going to blow smoke and dodge questions why bother coming here?

    Unlike you guys who make excuses for the false teachings your church puts out, I wont make excuses for Christians who do it and will do my best to call them to account or tell them they are not brothers in the Lord. Rick b

  28. Olsen Jim says:

    Are we talking about the fallibility of prophets or whether it is possible to exaggerate God’s greatness? Does every thread have to deteriorate into a debate about and rehashing of the journal of discourses? If so, then this site is worthless.

    Aaron argues that the Mormon view of God understates God’s greatness. I responded by showing how in many legitimate measures, the LDS view of God is far greater than the EV view.

    What is the response in every thread and discussion? Demand that LDS posters explain Adam-God or polygamy or inconsistencies in teachings of prophets, etc. This comes across as though you are representing a weak, unsustainable position.

    Please tell me how I am incorrect in demonstrating how the LDS God is greater in His power to redeem, greater in His love, and greater in his creative achievements.

    One of the only legitimate responses I have heard is the idea of God creating things out of nothing. I believe that this is a completely bogus doctrine, but that is beside the point. The question is- is a god who can create something from nothing greater than a god who creates things from material that already exists.

    I contend that it really doesn’t matter too much. It is a matter of method rather than true greatness. If the guy down the street creates one mediocre car out of nothing, and another guy creates an infinite number of supreme quality cars out of pre-existing material, which is of greatest value and power? To me, there is absolutely no question.

    The other argument is that a god who has existed forever in the same state is greater than one who has progressed to his current state, even if the one who progressed surpasses the other by every possible measure of achievement. It is an arbitrary argument to the core.

    The LDS God has created and redeemed infinitely more children than the EV God. And the power of the LDS atonement far surpasses that of the EV. These are the facts.

  29. Ralph says:


    Just some more to back Jim up from the PoGP Institute Manual, page 6-

    Moses 1:35–38. “There Are Many Worlds”

    President Brigham Young said: “How many earths are there? I observed this morning that you may take the particles of matter composing this earth, and if they could be enumerated they would only be a beginning to the number of the creations of God; and they are continually coming into existence, and undergoing changes and passing through the same experience that we are passing through” (in Journal of Discourses, 14:71).

    Moses 1:35–39. Jesus Christ Redeemed All of God’s Creations

    Elder Marion G. Romney, then a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, taught: “Jesus Christ, in the sense of being its Creator and Redeemer, is the Lord of the whole universe. Except for his mortal ministry accomplished on this earth, his service and relationship to other worlds and their inhabitants are the same as his service and relationship to this earth and its inhabitants…
    “…In short, Jesus Christ, through whom God created the universe, was chosen to put into operation throughout the universe Elohim’s great plan ‘to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man’—the gospel of Jesus Christ—the only way whereby man can obtain eternal life” (“Jesus Christ: Lord of the Universe,” Improvement Era, Nov. 1968, 46, 48; see also D&C 76:19–24).

    We teach that Heavenly Father has created and populated other planets besides this planet. However, we are only given the knowledge needed for us to achieve salvation, we do not know what happens on the other planets except for a few small snippets.

  30. Rick B says:

    OJ said

    Are we talking about the fallibility of prophets or whether it is possible to exaggerate God’s greatness? Does every thread have to deteriorate into a debate about and rehashing of the journal of discourses? If so, then this site is worthless.

    OJ, it’s like this, questions naturally arise in any topic and on any subject. If you think this site is worthless then by all means please leave, It’s almost pointless to talk to people who claim to have the love of the Savior but then do not want to share that love and complain that they have been asked questions and refuse to give honest answers.

    Then you said your prophets are fallible. According to the Bible if the prophet speaks for God and it does not come to pass then they are liars and false prophets. According to LDS doctrine if a prophet speaks for god and it does not come to pass, then it’s ok, their only human, if they contradict each other it’s ok, go with what sounds the best.

    Again OJ, I know you will avoid my question, it’s ok, you guys are famous for doing this, but who exactly are LDS loving when they avoid questions? or when they refuse to share the love of Christ with people? or where is the love when you complain about questions your asked and then attack us over it? Rick b

  31. OJ wrote

    Can a God who changes laws be trusted to keep His word? Pretty hard to have faith in such a being.


    Believe it or not, you have stumbled on the CORE ISSUE of the Biblical revelation of God. It goes like this;

    1 God is not subject to anything, so He is absolutely free to to absolutely anything He likes (including changing the rules of the game, if it suits him).

    2 Given that we cannot hold God accountable to anything higher than Himself, does that put us (and the entire cosmos) in a precarious position? For example, He could, simply annihilate the whole thing (us included) on a whim, or if He got bored, or for whatever reason He felt like, and there is absolutely nothing anyone could do to stop Him.

    3 So, how can we be confident of our continued existence in this life (and the next)?

    4 Our only confidence is on what kind of God He is. Can He be relied upon? Does He keep His word?

    It should therefore come as no surprise that the Bible is full of statements affirming God’s consistency, and His consistent commitment to the welfare of His people. What is also noteworthy about these statements is that God is consistent because it is His nature to be so.

    E.g. “God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?” (Num 23:19)

    “See now that I myself am He! There is no god besides me. I put to death and I bring to life, I have wounded and I will heal, and no-one can deliver out of my hand.” (Deut 32:39)

    “When God made his promise to Abraham, since there was no one greater for him to swear by, he swore by himself…God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope offered to us may be greatly encouraged.” (Heb 6:13-18)

    When we talk about having faith, its all about having faith in the person of God. Can you trust Him?

  32. As a PS to the above post, I just remembered Romans 1:18-20

    The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

  33. jackg says:


    Praying for you. That’s about all I can do at this point.

  34. liv4jc says:

    OJ, you blasphemed by calling God (YHWH), who is the God I worship, “mediocre”, when YHWH Himself claims absolute sovereignty and glory for Himself. He claims that He is the only God and there is no other (Isaiah 43:10). That leaves no room for your Elohim, or Elohim’s dad, or Elohim’s grandfather, etc. The only evidence you have that your god redeemed an endless number of worlds is your imagination and the imagination of your prophets. You claim, “The only traits I mentioned are that He has existed in His current state forever and created and redeemed this earth. Do you believe something different?” If that’s what you believe, then you aren’t following LDS doctrine. Your god has not always been god, and that is especially true if you are referring to your Jehovah, who is not an eternal being, but is the offspring of Elohim and some LDS goddess who goes unnamed. Even your Elohim is not eternal, but progressed from spiritbabyhood to godhood. He has not always been a god. At one time he was just as much a god-in-embryo as you believe you are.
    There is no god named Elohim. Elohim is a title that YHWH uses to describe Himself as God. The word elohim is used of others in the Bible who are not gods, but have authority over others. The nation that YHWH first revealed Himself to were meant to be strict monotheists, and strictly monolotrous. They only believed in one God (Deut 6:4), and they only worshipped one God (1st and 2nd Commandments). They were God’s covenant people. To leave that covenant by going after other gods was to invite the wrath of YHWH. Your view of the OT is that Jehovah was the god of Israel and is the Jesus of the NT. Heavenly Father is nowhere to be found in the OT outside of Genesis. Mormons like to claim that Trinitarian Christians have Jesus talking to himself at the baptism, etc.

  35. liv4jc says:

    Christians realize that the One God exists in three persons so Jesus is not talking to himself. But Mormons have the same problem in texts like Psalm 110 where King David is speaking of the Father (YHWH) telling the Messiah (Lord) to sit at His right hand. Is Jesus telling himself to sit at his own right hand? Jesus himself uses Psam 110 to declare that it is speaking of him and so do the apostles. Read through Isaiah 40-59 (Deutero-Isaiah) and see which person of the Godhead is sending the Redeemer. Is Jesus sending himself? Is Jesus the suffering servant sent by YHWH in Isaiah 53 or not? But I’ll point you to two characteristic YHWH claims for himself unique from all other gods (other than his ability to foretell the future because he ordained it). He is the creator of the universe, and he is the first and the last. These traits are all found in Deutero-Isaiah. What do we know of Jesus as revealed in the NT? He is the creator (John 1:2, Colossians 2:14-17, Hebrews 2:10) of all things, as they were created by him and for him. But these traits are also true of God (the Father) because Romans 1:20, 11:36, and Hebrews 1:10 tell us so. I don’t think it’s necessary to go into the texts of Revelation to discover that Jesus claims for himself the title of First and Last, Alpha and Omega, just as as YHWH does in Isaiah. So what we clearly see is that the Father is YHWH, and the Son is also YHWH. This is something LDS doctrine cannot reconcile. Your God is not the God of the Bible, and calling the God of the Bible “mediocre” is blasphemy.

  36. liv4jc says:

    Excuse my shoddy typing. I meant John 1:3 and Colossians 1:14-17 when referring to Jesus as creator.

  37. Mike R says:


    You said, ” so do only LDS males believe our
    doctrine? That’s news to me as well
    as the majority of members of the
    church who happen to be female.”

    You read into my statement something that simply
    was’nt there. I never said that ONLY males believe
    this doctrine of yours.

    I wonder though if Mormon women understand that
    as a Goddess wife and mother they’ll be denied
    a normal aspect of motherhood, as her husband
    will deny their children the need to communicate
    with their mother, while they sojourn on an earth.
    [LDS prophets counsel: prayer ill-advised to
    Heavenly Mother]. This an offical Mormon family

    You said, ” I suggest you look into the ancient
    writings on deification–some of those
    pesky Jews and early christians had
    beliefs pretty close to ours on the

    I am aware of this Mormon argument. However,
    believers, whether early or late , understood
    the immense difference between the One True
    Almighty Creator and His creatures, something
    Mormon prophets fail to recognize. Isa.44:7 ;

  38. Mike R commented

    Today those imaginations find a home in the heart of sincere Mormon males who, submissive to their Prophets/Apostles teachings ,embrace the desire to become a God

    I’m currently revising my views on the doctrine of eternal progression, based on the recorded comments of Joseph Smith and the opinions of his followers expressed here.

    Previously, I thought that the idea of “becoming” God expressed a future hope, in the sense that “if I do the right thing, then one day (maybe in the next life) I will rise up and tread in the footsteps of God” (see Lorenzo Snow’s rhyme).

    Now, I think that these shining lights of Mormonism don’t just consider themselves to be “becoming” gods; they are “already” gods. So, just as God (in the orthodox sense) imagines something to be and speaks it into being, they think that if they believe in something hard enough, it comes into being.

    Perhaps to them, the internal contradictions of Mormon doctrine are a kind of gymnasium in which to develop their “divine muscles”.

    E.g. if the BoM is a un-historical myth, then they believe it and it becomes an un-historical myth. If it is a historical account of ancient north America, then they believe it and it becomes a historical account of ancient north America. The evidence of its historicity is there, then it’s not there, depending on whether the believer calls it into being or not.

    Gods in embryo. What a gift! What magic they weave! The Universe rotates to their dictates (Terence Trent Derby, Wishing Well). Being subject to so many opposing self-interests, we lesser mortals just have to pray that our time passes un-noticed by these “gods”.

    Thankfully, we have the Christian revelation to call the cosmos to order.

    Then I heard what sounded like a great multitude, like the roar of rushing waters and like loud peals of thunder, shouting: “Hallelujah! For our Lord God Almighty reigns…

    (Rev 19:6, and Handel’s “Hallelujah” Chorus)

  39. Technical note to MikeR,

    I think I’ve found the problem with your posts (the text does not “spread” horizontally to fill the field), though I don’t know how to fix it.

    Whatever text editor or browser you’re using is putting in line breaks (carriage returns) automatically. It might be a problem in translation because Windows does it differently from other systems, see here…


    I suggest you try a different browser, but please don’t stop posting if you can’t.

  40. setfree says:

    Martin, what a funny, but unfunny, realistic conclusion you arrived at. I sure enjoy your comments.

  41. Olsen Jim says:

    Does anybody have a response to the issues I brought up other than accusing me of blaspheme, claiming I think I am god, or telling me you can only pray for me? Doesn’t this reveal something about the position you are defending?

    Martin- I maintain that God keeps His word and covenants. He will never “change His mind” as you suggest He could. How could you have faith in a covenant from which the other party can opt out of at any time? You seem to be contradicting yourself in the same paragraph. I trust God completely to keep His covenants and promises because He and eternal Law are completely united.

    liv4jc- Did you note my language in the comparisons I made? I said that for the sake of argument, lets assume the LDS God had progressed….. Going off into your version of the ancient Israelite religion or arguments over the biblical basis for the trinity are really beside the point. I am talking about our two religions, here and now.

    Maybe I misunderstand the point of Aaron’s article.

  42. Rick B says:

    OJ, Your a perfect example of LDS not being Honest and not showing love. Your a perfect example of why no one trusts you guys.

    You said

    Does anybody have a response to the issues I brought up other than accusing me of blaspheme, claiming I think I am god, or telling me you can only pray for me?

    First off I answered your questions, So this shows your either a liar, or your ignoring my reply’s.

    If your lying then how can we trust you to know the truth?

    If you ignored my reply, then how can we take you serious if you avoid direct reply’s and if you have so little care for the answer then why are you here?

    Then you sit here and say you want answers to your questions, yet you refuse to answer my questions that I point blank asked you. Why do you sit here and accuse us of not answering you, when you do to me what you accuse us of? Boy that shows the love of the Savior does it not?

    It revels the real god you follow, the god of this world Satan who has no love and only cares to destroy the things of God.

    My over all feeling about the way you act are summed up from a poster on this blog Named, OJ, O-wait thats you, well to quote you about how you act I say,

    Doesn’t this reveal something about the position you are defending?

    Rick b

  43. falcon says:

    Actually what you expressed is in line with what many in the word-of-faith movement would believe. That is, that through faith, a believer can speak things into existence. A person’s faith is like a creative force. In-a-sense then, a believer becomes a mini-god (as I would characterize it). It’s called “positive confession”.
    Bruce Barron sums up the thought process behind his critique of this when he writes, “If we are willing and obedient we can write our own ticket with God. We must say what we desire, act on what we have said, receive by faith and confess our faith before others. We do not need to see the results in order to know that God has brought them to pass. Through the steadfast confidence that our faith will bring God’s promises to pass, we are entitled to call things that are not as though they were.” (“The Health and Wealth Gospel”; Bruce Barron) Kenneth Hagin, Jr sums it up by saying, “Everything Jesus purchased for us on Calvary can be obtained by faith.”
    So then the question becomes, what did Jesus purchase on the Cross. My answer would be salvation for all those who would believe in Him for eternal life. Evidently, some see the death of Christ as purchasing more than just salvation. For Mormons it’s part of becoming a god as long as they do enough to merit this status.
    I’m sure if Joseph Smith would have gotten a hold of positive confession back when he was inventing his religion, he would have incorporated it into his “you can become a god too” program.

  44. Olsen Jim says:


    Please show how I have been dishonest.

    You keep trying to take this conversation off topic- discussing general theological issues and how the Mormon prophets are inconsistent, etc. etc.

    Your questions? Your question to me was “If your god is so powerful and loving as you claim, how come he never takes the incentive to speak to the LDS prophets and clear up all these issues that arise…?”

    You cannot be serious. Honestly- that is a ridiculous question. It is a straw man argument. There is not an answer to such questions. And as such, it only functions to distract the conversation away from the real point.

    Same goes for your statements about my lack of love, etc. etc. I will remember that trick next time you or another critic here attacks Joseph Smith, the BOM, or the church. Ultimate trump card.

    You have not answered my points at all. Nobody has. And that is fine. But I want to point out to lurkers that there are no good responses to my points. The LDS doctrine esteems Heavenly Father more highly than any other system of belief by far.

  45. Jim & Ralph,

    You guys miss the point. We could debate over how many worlds and how many people your god has to do with, but will you not agree with that whatever number “it” is – it is not infinite and it is not even all there is? There are other gods who have created other worlds, so the majesty that you attribute to your god is shared by other gods. Are either of you challenging that point?

    Jim, it is you who has not addressed how your “loving” god sends his own kids to outer darkness. I take it that we agree that your god did not “create” the matter for the air he breathes or the very throne he sits on.

    The only “rules” that my God plays by are those that flow from Him and His nature. Roughly put, He is the rules. The same cannot be said of your god. Your god followed eternal rules, that predate his godhood, and in so doing became a god. Your god must still operate within the parameters of those rules in dealing with us. And you really think your god is greater? It is indeed possible to exaggerate about your god
    Prov 18:17.

  46. Rick B says:

    OJ, Your being dishonest because your question has been answered by me and others, yet instead of being honest and saying, I do not agree with your view or how you come to it, you simply say, you never answered my question, we both know thats being dishonest.

    All you can do is say, My god is greater than your God because he created many worlds with many people, that proves my god is greater. That proves nothing, if your god is false and so is your prophet, then your god really did not do that stuff.

    Then it’s been pointed out how the God of the Bible says, I can swear by no higher power than myself, since their is nothing greater than Me.

    The God of the Bible say’s, Their are no gods before me and no gods formed after me, None, period.

    So how can you say that your god is so powerful if he is only a god in a long line of gods? When my God says He is the only one? You god could only create with things already around, yet you say, if a God that creates a crappy car out of nothing, lets say a toyota, verses a god that creates a porsha out of things already here proves he is a better god is crazy.

    A God who can take nothing and create out of nothing is far better than a god who must use things laying around. But you say your god created a better product from things already here, You will not find in the BoM that your so called product is better than what my God created.

    So your question has been answered over and over, so your being dishonest. A least if you do not like the answer be honest and say, I do not like the answer, were showing you all this from the Bible, if you dont agree with or like the Bible simply say so, stop accusing us of not answering you.

    Then since we did answer you, we can bring up side issues that do pertain to the topic at hand, even if you do not like them. If your god is so powerful and loving as you claim, then things like your god speaking to a prophet on a subject, be it Adam god or polygamy do apply. Cont Below,

  47. Rick B says:

    They apply because we want to know how a so powerful god can speak to the LDS prophet and get it wrong, or not speak clear enough or why he cannot clear up these issues.

    When Elijah went to confront the 400 prophets of Baal and asked them to set up an alter and pray to their god to send fire to take out the alter, their god never responded, He mocked their god and asked if he was maybe using the toilet, or impotent Etc, He mocked the lack of power the Baal’s god had.

    Thats your god, he lacks love or power, he cannot even clear up simple question, yet you defend him to the death and then accuse us of stuff, I showed you, now grow up or leave. Rick b

  48. Mike R says:


    Thanks for your help.I really appreciate it a lot.
    I have’nt given up on my computer. Thanks also
    for sharing your insights on God’s Word.I learn
    much from your posts.


    You stated that there are those on this blog who
    are saying that you are claiming to be God.

    All I know is what I read from Mormon prophets
    and apostles, and Church curriculum, and these
    clearly state that you, as a worthy Mormon male,
    can arise to become an Almighty God who will
    then obviously be worshipped. What is described
    in Rev 4:8 will be said to you one day by those
    who worship you. Ralph has admitted this to me,
    and it only confirmed what I have read in Mormon
    leaders teachings.

    I would ask you to abandon this doctrine, but
    that is between you and God.The stakes could’nt
    be higher.

  49. jackg says:


    Loved your posts. Excellent!


  50. Rick B says:

    OJ, Where are you? You go into hiding? I exposed you as a liar, I answered you over and over, now the lurkers you say your helping can see for themselves how it is you they need to beware of. Rick b

Leave a Reply