Can the missionaries really help you?

Posted on January 10, 2013 by Eric Johnson

Russel M. NelsonIn the last General Conference, Apostle Russell M. Nelson gave a talk titled “Ask the Missionaries! They Can Help You!” (Apparently there were lots of exclamation points in this talk!!!)

Earlier on the first day of the conference, President Thomas S. Monson had explained that 18-year-old males and 19-year-old females were now qualified to become missionaries (instead of 19 and 21). The news was very exciting for many Mormons, as the number of applications went up by 471% within just a few weeks. It will not be surprising to me if the church has 100,000 missionaries by next year, especially since so many more females are applying.

Nelson said that “missionaries can help in many ways.” First of all, he said, they can help those who want to do genealogical work. Honestly, I doubt many of the teenaged missionaries have ever looked up their family records. Yes, their parents and grandparents, maybe, but how many 18-year-old boys know much about a science that is largely learned through experience?

Next, Nelson said the missionaries can help members who are not presently participating in church functions. Perhaps with so many missionaries, the teenagers can go around to the less active members’ homes and ring the doorbell a few minutes before the church service to make sure they get there on time. Really, though, can most of these teens know what it’s like to doubt whether “The Church” is true? Most of them have merely parroted their parents’ faith, probably attending seminary classes and going with the flow. Now that the boys will move straight from high school to the mission field, they may have very little time to think through their faith and see if it’s true.

Recently a pair of missionaries came to my house. One was 21 who grew up in the Mormon Church. He became a missionary because, finally, he received a testimony about the church just a few months before. (I wonder if this was not more of an issue that he couldn’t get any dates with nice Mormon girls.) Off, then, he went to the MTC. The other was 19, a more traditional missionary. Neither had any kind of exposure to Evangelical Christianity. By moving the age requirement down, it will be interesting to see the impact upon these younger men and women, some of whom will be seriously challenged in their faith for the first time at a younger age.

A third benefit to talking to the missionaries, Nelson said, is that “some of you may want to know how to conquer an addiction or live longer and enjoy better health.” How many teenagers have conquered an addiction? Honestly, I’ve never met a missionary who I thought had ever imbibed or inhaled, let alone had an addiction. Their lack of experience in these types of matters does not make them experts in conquering addictions. As far as better health, was Nelson serious? I’ve seen the missionaries stuffing themselves at Golden Corral or getting another soda at the fountain at McDonalds. I hear that they eat plenty of Top Ramen and Mac and Cheese during their missions. These are teen-agers, for Pete’s sake! How are they going to teach me how to live longer?

Fourth, if “you feel a gnawing emptiness, without direction or purpose,” Nelson promised that the missionaries can help. Unfortunately, the missionaries have very little practical spiritual experience besides their own faith. Most can’t tell me the different between the Qu’ran and the Tripitaka. They have never looked into Zen or know the fundamentals of Evangelical Christianity. All they know is what they have experienced, which for most of them is TBM (True Blue Mormonism). They know the standard lines (i.e. Joseph Smith was a true prophet, the Book of Mormon is true, Thomas S. Monson is true, and yes, anything connected to Mormonism is true), but they really don’t know why. Their critical thinking skills are not fully functional yet. How do they really know if what they are believing is true? The pat answer: “I have prayed about it and know it is true.” This just isn’t good enough.

Nelson continued, saying that the missionaries can also help if “you have concerns about your family” by helping with the “strengthening of marriages and families.” However, these young men and women have never been married. How are they qualified to somehow become marriage/family counselors? According to Nelson, they “can also help you with your desire for greater knowledge.” But most missionaries have had no more than a year of college, and as I mentioned before, soon the missionaries will be knocking on our doors right out of high school. I have taught high schoolers, and while many of them are bright, their knowledge is not necessarily higher than those whose doors they are knocking on.

Finally, Nelson said that in a recent study “Latter-day Saints were the most knowledgeable about Christianity and the Bible.” Why is it, then, that missionaries with whom I converse have no idea about the passages in the Bible that say there is only one God? That they think the Trinity means one God in three gods? That they have the idea that salvation by grace is nothing more than resurrection from the dead? That they think the Bible is filled with many contradictions and errors? Honestly, I doubt many of them have ever studied the Bible except for passages that were required reading in seminary and missionary training.

No, Mr. Nelson, the missionaries are of little service to those who have studied their Bibles. My only hope with lowering the age of the missionaries is that I might get more visits from them. Maybe I could help them!

Posted in General Conference, Mormon Culture, Mormon Missionaries | Tagged , , | 111 Comments

The Second Anointing of Modern-day Mormonism

Posted on January 7, 2013 by Sharon Lindbloom

handsLatter-day Saint Tom Phillips was an Area Executive Secretary for the Mormon Church in the United Kingdom when an LDS General Authority invited him to receive his Second Anointing in the Preston England Temple. On Sunday, 19 May 2002, Mr. Phillips and his wife received their “second endowment,” in the company of four additional worthy couples, under the leadership of Mormon Apostle M. Russell Ballard. Eighteen months later Mr. Phillips’ faith in Mormonism was beginning to crumble.

Tom Phillips presents a detailed chronicle of his experience and the little-discussed Second Anointing temple ordinance on his webpage at Mormon Think. According to his account, in the days leading up to his special endowment,

“I reflected on my own life and personal worthiness. I read all that Elder McConkie had written on the subject [as he had been told to do] and looked forward to the day with excitement. Basically, Elder McConkie wrote that, during the first endowment you are given certain blessings to become a king and a priest (queen and priestess) to the most high God, and these blessings are conditional on you remaining worthy of them. With the second endowment, the conditions are removed as you have already proven your faithfulness and entitlement to the blessings. Therefore, you are sealed up to the highest degree of the celestial kingdom unconditionally. Any sins committed afterward may render you liable to the buffetings in the flesh, but they will not prevent you from attaining your exaltation. The only sin that is unpardonable is denying the Holy Ghost (or in some passages the shedding of innocent blood).

“I had never expected this to happen to me. I assumed I would be judged in the next life, not have that judgment made in this life. It meant I and my wife would be guaranteed a celestial glory unless we committed the ‘unpardonable sin’ which seemed to be unthinkable at the time. We had made it, the Lord, through his prophet, had informed us we were worthy of this high exaltation.”

Yet Mr. Phillips immediately encountered a conflict between being worthy of exaltation and obeying the counsel of his Church leaders. In order to protect the “secret” of the “second endowment” ordinance, the Phillipses were instructed not to tell anyone about the ordinance, to be vague or even misleading if questions arose. Tom Phillips explained,

“I did not like lying to my family and friends as to our whereabouts that weekend. I did not feel comfortable as it was dishonest but I was instructed not to disclose what was happening. To tell people you will be at the temple on a Sunday, when supposedly all temples are closed, would raise further questions. I therefore told my children we were going to the temple for the weekend and would be attending a special meeting with Elder Ballard and the Area President on Sunday. This was not too unusual for my children to accept as I regularly attended Area Presidency meetings and had been assisting these same brethren the day before at a training session for stake presidents. Also, it was as truthful as I considered I could be while still keeping the second anointing secret…

“While walking in the temple grounds in the early evening [of 18 May] we unexpectedly met a member of our ward who had attended a family wedding that day. She asked us what we were doing at the temple on a Saturday evening. I quickly mentioned something about Area Presidency meetings (she knew of my calling at the time, that I worked closely with the Area Presidency) and changed the subject. Again, I did not feel comfortable lying for the Lord.”

Though he doesn’t suggest as much, perhaps Mr. Phillips’ discomfort over deliberately disobeying one of the requirements for exaltation (i.e., “Be honest in our dealings with others and with the Lord” Gospel Principles, 291, 1986 edition) produced a seed of doubt that lay dormant until he began to “consider in more depth other truth claims of the church.”

During his Second Anointing Mr. Phillips was “ordained a king and a priest unto the Most High God, to rule and reign in the House of Israel forever.” He was given “the fullness of the priesthood” and a blessing that promised, without any condition of continued obedience, that he would “attain unto the Godhood,” have the “Power to be a member of a Godhead,” and was henceforth “Sealed up to eternal life” (among other things).

This all raises many questions in relation to Mormon doctrine and culture. Here is one to get the discussion started.

Our Mormon friends often criticize the Christian belief that our works do not contribute to our salvation. Some Mormons believe that Christians call upon this doctrine to justify sinful lifestyle choices, suggesting that there is no basis upon which to call a sinning Christian to repentance if his or her works have no effect on the person’s salvation. While I do not agree with this premise, I wonder: Do Mormons believe the same about those who have had their calling and election made sure via a Second Anointing?

Listen to Tom Phillips discuss his Second Anointing experience in this 2-part interview from the Mormon Stories Podcast with John Dehlin.

Posted in Mormon Temple, Salvation, Worthiness | Tagged , , , , | 80 Comments

Sobered by their demise — they went contrary to the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith

Posted on January 3, 2013 by Sharon Lindbloom

Delbert L. Stapley

Early in 1964 Mormon Apostle Delbert L. Stapley wrote a letter to his friend, Michigan Governor George W. Romney. Mr. Stapley wrote the letter due to concerns he had after hearing a pro-Civil Rights talk given by Governor Romney. Mr. Stapley wrote that what he heard did not “altogether harmonize with my own understandings regarding this subject.” Upon making it clear that he was not writing in his official Church position (although the letter was written on Church letterhead), and he was not speaking in behalf of the Mormon Church (“Only President McKay can speak for the Church”), Apostle Stapley asked Governor Romney to read and reflect on Joseph Smith’s teachings on the matter (i.e., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 269-270 “giving particular attention to the closing sentence on page 270,” and History of the Church 2:436-440 “[coming] back to the last paragraph on page 438”).

Mr. Stapley wrote,

“When I reflect upon the Prophet’s statements and remember what happened to three of our nation’s presidents who were very active in the Negro cause, I am sobered by their demise. They went contrary to the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith – unwittingly, no doubt, but nevertheless, the prophecy of Joseph Smith [quoting from History of the Church 2:438], ‘…those who are determined to pursue a course, which shows an opposition, and a feverish restlessness against the decrees of the Lord, will learn, when perhaps it is too late for their own good, that God can do His own work, without the aid of those who are not dictated by His counsel,’ has and will continue to be fulfilled.”

The Mormon Apostle continued, sharing a personal experience with Governor Romney:

“A friend of mine in Arizona—not a Church member—a great champion of the colored race—came to me after my call into the Twelve, and acknowledged President McKay to be a Prophet of God. He wanted me to ask President McKay to inquire of the Lord to see if the Lord would not lift the curse from the colored race and give them the privileges of the Priesthood. I explained to him that the Lord had placed the curse upon the Negro, which denied him the Priesthood; therefore, it was the Lord’s responsibility—not man’s—to change His decision. This friend of mine met a very tragic end by drowning. He was a most enthusiastic advocate of the colored cause and went about promoting for them all the privileges, social opportunities, and participation enjoyed by the Whites.”

As Mr. Stapley’s letter continued, he expressed his own “understandings regarding the Negro” as influenced by the statements of Joseph Smith. He wrote,

“I do not have any objection to recognizing the Negro in his place and giving him every opportunity for education, for employment, for whatever contribution he can make to the society of men… Yet all these things, in my judgment, should accord with the expressions of the Prophet Joseph Smith.”

Since the Civil Rights Act then before Congress did not accord with Joseph Smith’s views, Mr. Stapley judged it to be “vicious legislation” and apparently feared for Governor Romney’s life if he were to persist in supporting it.

Despite the pointed but kindly-motivated warning from Apostle Stapley, Governor Romney continued to work for and champion Civil Rights. A little more than 30 years later George Romney died of a heart attack. He was 88 years old.

Download a PDF file of Apostle Stapley’s letter, courtesy of the Boston Globe.

Posted in Mormon Culture, Mormon History | Tagged , , , , | 58 Comments

Twenty-four elders cast their crowns before the throne.

Posted on December 31, 2012 by Sharon Lindbloom

In this two-minute video Dr. Stephen Lawson, preaching on Worshiping the Triune God, explains why the twenty-four elders in Revelation 4:10-11 cast their crowns before the throne of God.

May we all live throughout the new year with a deep and abiding awareness of this truth.
“All that I am I am by your grace.”
Amen.

Posted in Christianity, Grace | Tagged , | 10 Comments

A Mormon Prophet’s Gratitude at Christmas

Posted on December 27, 2012 by Sharon Lindbloom

Earlier this week Eric Johnson posted a poem here on Mormon Coffee titled “The Gift.” I venture to say that gifts of all kinds are on our minds this week. With the idea of gifts also (hopefully!) comes an attitude of gratitude.

In December 1997 Ensign magazine printed a First Presidency Message by the (now late) Mormon prophet Gordon B. Hinckley titled “A Season for Gratitude.” President Hinckley wrote of Jesus Christ, quoting liberally (and exclusively) from the Bible as he described the person and ministry of Christ. He concluded, “We love Him. We honor Him. We thank Him. We worship Him. He has done for each of us and for all mankind that which none other could have done. God be thanked for the gift of His Beloved Son, our Savior, the Redeemer of the world, the Lamb without blemish who was offered as a sacrifice for all mankind.”

While most of the world would agree with Michelle King at Deseret News that the Christmas season is all about Jesus — it “is all about him,” she said — not everybody feels the same way. For example, President Hinckley’s preamble to “A Season of Gratitude” was not what one would normally expect to find in a message about Christ and Christmas. He began,

This is a season for giving and a time for gratitude. We remember with appreciation the birth of the Prophet Joseph Smith, which is celebrated this same month of December, two days before Christmas.

How great indeed is our debt to him. His life began in Vermont and ended in Illinois, and marvelous were the things that happened between that simple beginning and tragic ending. It was he who brought us a true knowledge of God, the Eternal Father, and His Risen Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. During the short time of his great vision he learned more concerning the nature of Deity than all of those who through centuries had argued the matter in learned councils and scholarly forums. He brought us the marvelous Book of Mormon as another witness for the living reality of the Son of God. To him, from those who held it anciently, came the priesthood, the power, the gift, the authority, the keys to speak and act in the name of God. He gave us the organization of the Church and its great and sacred mission. Through him were restored the keys of the holy temples, that men and women might enter into eternal covenants with God and that the great work for the dead might be accomplished to open the way for eternal blessings.

Great is his glory and endless his priesthood.
Ever and ever the keys he will hold.
Faithful and true, he will enter his kingdom,
Crowned in the midst of the prophets of old.
(“Praise to the Man,” Hymns, no. 27)

He was the instrument in the hands of the Almighty. He was the servant acting under the direction of the Lord Jesus Christ in bringing to pass this great latter-day work.

We stand in reverence before him. He is the great prophet of this dispensation. He stands at the head of this great and mighty work which is spreading across the earth. He is our prophet, our revelator, our seer, our friend. Let us not forget him. Let not his memory be forgotten in the celebration of Christmas. God be thanked for the Prophet Joseph.

In his article about gratitude, President Hinckley wrote glowingly of both Joseph Smith and Jesus Christ. I would like to delineate some of President Hinckely’s points regarding Joseph and Jesus:

  • It was Joseph who “brought us a true knowledge of God, the Eternal Father, and His Risen Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.”
  • While Jesus “taught us the wondrous things of God.”
  • Through Joseph “were restored the keys of the holy temples, that men and women might enter into eternal covenants with God…to open the way for eternal blessings.”
  • While Jesus “gave the keys through which we may go on to immortality and eternal life.”
  • Jesus “has done for each of us…that which none other could have done.”
  • Yet “How great is our debt” to Joseph for the things he has done for us.
  • “We honor” Jesus.
  • “We stand in reverence” before Joseph.
  •  In the words of the apostle John quoted by President Hinckley, “We beheld [Jesus’] glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father…”
  • In the words of the Mormon hymn “Praise to the Man,” quoted by President Hinckley, “Great is [Joseph’s] glory.”
  • “God be thanked for the gift of His beloved Son.”
  • And “God be thanked for the Prophet Joseph.”

Christmas is a season that is all about Christ and the Gift of the Babe who was born a King. For Christians, the memory of Joseph Smith has no place in the celebration of Christmas. All glory, honor, praise and thanksgiving belong to Jesus —

For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given;
and the government shall be upon his shoulder,
and his name shall be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.  (Isaiah 9:6-7)

Posted in Gordon B. Hinckley, Jesus Christ, Joseph Smith, Mormon Culture | Tagged , , | 39 Comments

What Kind of Gift?

Posted on December 24, 2012 by Eric Johnson

The Gift

All the hustle and bustle of the anticipated Holiday is quickly closing nigh,
And many frazzled shoppers can at last let out a collective great big sigh,

Their present-buying is done and all the cards are finally addressed,
The children have been put to bed as it’s time for them to get some rest.

Most of the world now awaits Santa Claus, he’s flying through the air,
He and his reindeer will deliver what all the elves have made to share.

So as everyone’s heads hit the pillows on this quiet Christmas Eve night,
Not a creature is stirring, and even the tiny mice are sleeping out of sight.

Many people are merely dreaming about what the Jolly Fat Man can lift,
Yet Someone more special is wanting to deliver a different kind of gift.

What kind of gift, you might ask? It’s something that can never get broken,
You would never have to wait in a return line, it’s much more than a token.

While the presents under the tree last usually an hour or two, maybe three,
What I am talking about goes on and on and actually right into eternity.

But just like the fake Rolex on the corner many charlatans want to imitate,
They will say this “gift” is what you work for, hurry up before it’s too late.

What if I pull out my wallet when I get a gift, what would the giver surmise?
No, we understand that a gift is a gift, this should not be a great big surprise.

And this is the way it is with the Babe who came to us in a smelly old stable,
Yet how unfortunate that so many consider this to be just an annual fable.

Immanuel, given to us two thousand years ago cannot be purchased in a mall,
This one—born, lived, and died before He was resurrected—offers a Gift to all.

Truly if we open up our hearts and receive this Gift –Jesus Christ to the earth,
There is nothing I consider more valuable or anything that has a greater worth.

Without the Father’s grace, mercy, and love, all of us share an eternally bad fate,
But receivers of the priceless Gift, it’s heaven we get, how amazing we now rate!

So this Christmas Eve, when everything is finished and you lay your heads down,
Remember the Gift given to those who believe, it is what we know as Paradise Found.

Posted in Jesus Christ | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

From the Mailbag (9/5/2012)

Posted on December 20, 2012 by Sharon Lindbloom

[Tess, quoting from “Redefining the Virgin Birth: Mormonism on the Natural Conception of Jesus” by McKeever and Shafovaloff]:

“When one considers that Mormonism teaches that every human born on earth is a literal spirit child of God, the concept that Jesus was conceived in a natural manner becomes even more blasphemous. Why? Because it means the Jesus of Mormonism was conceived in an incestuous union between Heavenly Father and his spirit-daughter Mary.”

Don’t Mormons believe that we are all brothers and sisters? Making every union incestuous? I don’t see this as a valid point in any way, seeing that every single union is “within the family.” Also, be weary to judge incest. Look at Adam’s family. Modern minds see incest much differently than they would have in the beginning of life on earth.

[Again quoting “Redefining the Virgin Birth”]:

“The problem with Mormonism saying that God had sex with Mary is that it comes from a worldview that says divinity isn’t so different from humanity. The whole point of the virgin conception is that it is the event where God added an entirely different nature to himself: humanity. God became a man. The ironic, pagan heresy of Mormonism’s suggestion that God had sex with Mary is that it collapses the God/man divide and reverses the larger narrative: man became a God.”

This is also a little mind-twisting. No belief in the trinity=no problem here. If God the Father has a resurrected, perfect body of flesh and bone, He is already “man”? Jesus the Christ was be 100% man, 100% God. That is what made Him so remarkable…

We believe that Mary was actually taken up, rather than Heavenly Father coming down to the earth, but no mortal, unclean human being can be in the sight of God so the Holy Ghost comes upon Mary so that she can conceive Christ. Based on my study of Mormon doctrine and theology, I would say that, yes, Heavenly Father had sexual intercourse with Mary. Does this rattle my faith? Not at all. My belief in Jesus being the only begotten Son of God in the flesh (as opposed to Adam and Eve, who were begotten obviously, but not in the flesh because they were not “subject to mortality”- which is the definition of in the flesh) depends on my belief that Jesus did not just poof into Mary’s uterus.

Thanks,
Tess

Hi Tess,

Thank you for taking the time to email Mormonism Research Ministry and sharing your perspective on issues surrounding the LDS view of the Virgin Birth of Christ.

I was a bit surprised at your argument against the impropriety of incest between God the Father and His literal daughter, Mary. As I understand it, you are saying that since all human sexual relations are incestuous (according to the logical conclusion inherent in Mormon doctrine), it is not a problem (not “blasphemous”) for Heavenly Father to have had sexual intercourse with His daughter. I think you are missing the main point.

The article you are referring to is a discussion about the way Mormonism has “redefined” the Christian doctrine of Christ’s Virgin Birth. The article is not examining the Mormon view of human sexuality nor is it written from an LDS perspective. It is written from the Christian (and biblical) perspective which finds the Mormon doctrine of God the Father engaged in an incestuous sexual relationship with His daughter to be “blasphemous.” The Bible specifically calls out the sin of various incestuous relationships (as well as sexual aberrations) in Leviticus 20, using descriptive words like “perversion,” “abomination,” “depravity,” “disgrace,” “iniquity,” “impurity,” and “sin.” Therefore, from a Christian perspective, the nature of this “incestuous union” is a valid point.

You also took issue with the statement in the MRM article that said, “The problem with Mormonism saying that God had sex with Mary is that it comes from a worldview that says divinity isn’t so different from humanity. The whole point of the virgin conception is that it is the event where God added an entirely different nature to himself: humanity. God became a man. The ironic, pagan heresy of Mormonism’s suggestion that God had sex with Mary is that it collapses the God/man divide and reverses the larger narrative: man became a God.” Again, I would remind you that the author is discussing the doctrines that make Mormonism’s teaching on the Virgin Birth different from that of Christianity; he’s not presenting a formal argument against Mormon teachings.

Having said that, your perspective on this, as I understand it, is that if one doesn’t believe in a God in Trinity the above point is baseless. I am unable to see how this is so; I don’t see a trinitarian necessity (or point) in what is written here. The author is noting that the classic Christian doctrine of the transcendency of God is absent in Mormonism. According to Mormon doctrine, man and God are of the same species: man is “a god in embryo.” …In Christian belief God is wholly and distinctly separate from creation (which includes man). He is not a man that became a God who then impregnated his daughter to become the father of a “demigod” in the flesh [see Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, “Demigod”]… Thus, as the author noted above, the Mormon view “collapses the God/man divide.”

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to clarify MRM’s article on the Virgin Birth. And thank you again for taking the time to share your thoughts.

In Christ,
Sharon

Mormon Coffee friends, the conclusion of the MRM article to which Tess’ email referred is also appropriate to note here:

The truth of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ as understood by Christians for two millenia is far too precious… We encourage Christians to lovingly question and challenge their Mormon neighbors over this issue. True repentance demands that a person be willing to embrace the Jesus Christ who was truly born of a virgin.

The supernatural birth of Jesus Christ identifies him as the Messiah, God’s only son. Jesus Christ is Lord. He commands everyone to repent and trust him for the free gift of eternal life and forgiveness of sins. Everyone who calls upon his name will be saved.

I pray that this message finds you well this holiday season, and I wish you a Merry Christmas!

Posted in Virgin birth | Tagged | 20 Comments

Joseph Smith vs Jesus Christ

Posted on December 17, 2012 by Aaron Shafovaloff

Joseph ordained with hands,
but Jesus authorized by his words.

Joseph tampered with God’s word,
but Jesus preserved God’s word.

Joseph boasted over his church,
but Jesus died for his church.

Joseph re-introduced the Aaronic priesthood,
but Jesus rendered it obsolete by his own blood.

Joseph said that a man became our God,
but Jesus, already equal with God, became a man.

Joseph devastated his wife with secretive polygamy,
but Jesus cherishes and nourishes his Bride as his own body.

Joseph sent his apostles on missions so he could proposition their wives,
but Jesus sent his apostles to be glorified in the gospel.

Joseph upgraded his First Vision to have both the Father and the Son,
but Jesus said that if you’ve seen the Son, you’ve already seen the Father.

Joseph offered godhood to his followers,
but Jesus promised the joy of knowing God.

Joseph was the founding prophet of the LDS Church,
but Jesus was the head of the last dispensation.

Joseph betrayed his friends,
but Jesus is the Good Shepherd who protects his flock.

JesusNotJoseph.com

Posted in Jesus Christ, Joseph Smith | Tagged , | 3 Comments

Mormonism and Behavior

Posted on December 13, 2012 by Sharon Lindbloom

The Heidelberg Catechism was first published in 1563. Described as “a comforting, practical summary of the [Christian] faith,” the catechism has been used for nearly 450 years to teach and summarize biblical doctrines. Ligonier Ministries’ daily devotional, Tabletalk, is basing its 2012 course of study on the Heidelberg Catechism’s questions and answers, looking specifically at the biblical texts used to define the doctrinal teachings.

When Tabletalk addresses Question 22, “What is then necessary for a Christian to believe?” the ensuing discussion regarding orthopraxy and orthodoxy details yet another striking difference between Mormonism and the Christian faith. As has been amply demonstrated here at Mormon Coffee throughout the years of dialog between Mormons and Christians, Mormonism is a religion of orthopraxy – that is, it is much more concerned with right behavior than with what individual members believe. Conversely, Christianity is a religion of orthodoxy – concerned first with right belief, which leads to right behavior. From Tabletalk (2 March 2012, Vol. 36, No. 3):

What Faith Must Believe

The Christian faith, in contrast to other systems, puts a premium on belief. To be sure, belief is important to other monotheistic religions such as Judaism and Islam. Yet these religions are often known as “religions of orthopraxy,” or religions of right practice. Consistent with their merit-based views of salvation, these religions generally elevate the right performance of rituals over doctrinal precision and exactitude. Christianity, however, is historically a “religion of orthodoxy,” a religion of right belief. Creeds tend to be emphasized over rituals. Christians identify each other not by the number of daily prayers, the direction they face in worship, and so on, but by the content of what they believe.

Of course, we do not want to minimize the importance of right practice, for Scripture emphasizes the need to obey the Lord (Deut. 11; John 14:15). Nevertheless, there is a logical priority of belief over practice. Surely, what we do influences what we believe, but it is impossible to do what is truly right if we do not believe what is truly right. God puts a premium on our minds and our hearts because our thoughts and our loves determine who we are and what we do (1 Sam. 16:7; Ps. 26:2-3; Prov. 23:7; Isa. 26:3; Mark 12:28-30; Rom. 8:6; 12:2).

So, the Heidelberg Catechism is certainly correct to define people as Christians according to what they must believe – the gospel (Q&A 22). But what the catechism defines as the gospel is not simply the idea that we must believe in Jesus. After all, belief in Jesus cannot make us Christians if we do not believe in the right Jesus. Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and even Muslims all claim to “believe in Jesus.” Yet only the biblical Jesus presented in the gospel saves sinners.

As we saw in a  Mormon Coffee post earlier this year, though Mormonism appears “obsessed” with Christ, the Christ it promotes is actually a different Jesus. At the close of the Tabletalk article quoted above readers are encouraged to apply right belief as they live Coram Deo — “before the face of God”:

We can imitate the example of Jesus all we want, but if we do not believe the gospel, we do not know Him. The gospel is simple—we are to put our hope of salvation only in the Son, who was sent by the Father and who pours out His Spirit on His people. At the same time, it will take an eternity to unfold the depths of the gospel. Let us continually return to the gospel and what it tells us about our triune Creator.

Posted in Christianity, Gospel, Salvation, Truth, Honesty, Prayer, and Inquiry | Tagged , , , | 151 Comments

The “Most High” has potentially billions of ancestor-gods?

Posted on December 10, 2012 by Aaron Shafovaloff

Mormon Jaxon Peterson argues that Israel was “monolatristic or henotheistic” for most of its existence and that “‘the highest’ does not denote status of authority of power, but rather the idea that God dwells above the Earth.”

[tweet https://twitter.com/ldschurch/status/275304640197824512]

[tweet https://twitter.com/JaxonPeterson/status/275420351134052353]

[tweet https://twitter.com/JaxonPeterson/status/275684295304155136]

[tweet https://twitter.com/JaxonPeterson/status/275684561453731841]

These are among the strongest LDS arguments against traditional Christian monotheism. How should Christians respond to this? Some thoughts:

1) Perhaps most helpful for understanding many of these issues is that an “elohim”, at generic minimum, refers to a heavenly being. Besides God himself, today we call them “angels” and “demons”. The Old Testament sometimes just calls them gods. Among all the elohim, Yahweh is THE elohim, the only true elohim. “None is like him.” As Isaiah says, “To whom will you compare him?” Authorized Israelite theology, as taught in scripture, is “polytheistic” *if* you expand the idea of “god” to include heavenly beings like angels and demons. But if you narrow the concept of God to a maximally great being who presides over all others, who is one-of-a-kind and ultimate, then authorized Israelite theology is monotheistic. Perhaps a better term for “monotheism” is “mono-Most-Highism.”

2) Given the semantic range behind “elohim”, to discover that the Old Testament affirms the existence of other elohim than Yahweh doesn’t point us in the direction of distinctive Mormon theology. Two things are needed: A) Demonstrating that these “gods” are of the same species or type of being as Yahweh. B) Demonstrating that authorized Israelite theology affirmed, or at least allowed for, the existence of greater, or higher, or prior beings than Yahweh. To support traditional Mormonism, both A & B are needed. To support neo-orthodox Mormonism (which tends to deny the existence of Heavenly Grandfather, et al.), at least A is needed. But simply affirming the existence of other “elohim” who are subordinate, inferior, finite, created beings under Yahweh does neither A nor B.

4) Isaiah 43:10.

5) If “Most High” simply describes a being that “dwells above the earth”, then that describes *all* “elohim” (Yahweh and angels and demons), since an “elohim” is by definition a being who dwells in the heavenlies. But only Yahweh among all elohim is the Most High.

6) It is natural to take superlatives about Yahweh as literal and not figurative. It is natural to take anthropomorphisms about Yahweh as figurative and not completely literal. But Mormonism flips this around. It doesn’t seem at all intuitive to call Yahweh the “Most High” if he has potentially billions of relationally superior ancestor-gods. I bring these assumptions and intuitions to the text, and also get them from the text. It’s the least awkward reading. I tell my wife in hyperbole that she is the greatest cook in the world, but with the worship of Yahweh, hyperbole hardly seems appropriate or necessary. There is a difference between the hyperbolic, “Yahweh, you are the best God EVAR”, and the non-exaggerative, completely serious, joyful eruption of praise, “Yahweh, you are the best God ever.”

Mormonism essentially teaches that we ought to make exaggerations about God when we worship him. While that kind of hyperbole might be a compliment to a human, it is an insult to God.

Israel’s neighbors, and at times, whoring, idolatrous Israelites, did believe that Yahweh (or Baal) had an ancestor-god or even a wife (Asherah). But the Old Testament consciously rejects these ideas. So by all means, if you want to join a modern-day semblance of an ancient Canaanite fertility cult, be a Mormon. But if you want to walk in the footsteps of the few faithful Israelites, reject idolatry and worship the Most High as literally being the Most High.

Posted in God the Father | Tagged , | 76 Comments