Let me open this forward prayer. Heavenly Father, thank you for this afternoon and a wonderful meal that we can enjoy together. And it is a tremendous privilege to meet with my brothers and sisters in Christ and purpose together to be better equipped to share the gospel with those who are of Mormon faith. We ask that you would give us clarity of mind here, that you give us some memory pegs along the way. So we could recall these things at appropriate moments and dialogues with Mormons. We ask that your grace be extended to those who are in the Mormon faith that They would come to recognize the false claims of Mormonism and see the truth of the gospel is found in your holy word. We thank you for salvation that it is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to your glory alone. And I pray that as we talk about who you are today. that you would help us to articulate rightly who you are and be able to explain that to people of other faiths, including things like Mormonism. We pray this in Jesus' name. Amen. Well, we mentioned at the beginning of our study of Mormonism together that one of the impetuses for starting this together was the establishment of a Mormon ward right back here in Imperial Oaks. And so since they're right here, this large building of worship that's been constructed this past year, it seemed appropriate with the onset of more Mormons in our community to be ready to engage them with the gospel. to know some distinctives about what the Mormons actually believe. We also mentioned several very influential Mormons that are present within the United States in particular, among whom we mentioned Mitt Romney, which has made no small stir in recent days, has it, if anyone's been following the political scene? I know, I think it was Bill, you told me last week after on Sunday morning you had mentioned to me, you had asked me if I had heard about what had been said about Mitt Romney. by this pastor at First Baptist, was it First Baptist, Dallas? I think that's right. I know his name here. I'll explain it in just a moment for those of you who weren't aware of it. But anyway, this was mentioned to me and so found this a really interesting illustration of just how important this discussion is. It's interesting that just it was just a week ago, I think it was on a Friday or Saturday, it was at some sort of rally. There was a pastor by the name of Robert Jeffress who caused quite a media storm when he came out and declared Mormonism a cult. And he encouraged evangelicals to vote for Rick Perry rather than Mitt Romney on that basis. So this caused quite a stir. Now, he didn't say anything about this as he actually, because he had introduced Rick Perry at this, you know, little rally that they were doing. He said that he made these comments after the rally to a reporter that he was talking with. And so he told this reporter this, quote, The Southern Baptist Convention, which is the largest Protestant denomination in the world, has officially labeled Mormonism a cult. I think Mitt Romney is a good moral man, but I think those of us who are born again followers of Christ should always prefer a competent Christian to a competent non-Christian like Mitt Romney. So that's why I'm enthusiastic about Rick Perry. Let's talk about that for just a minute. What do you think about this pastor's comments? What do you guys think? Okay, it's clearly not politically correct. No, it is not. And we'll talk more about what happens as a result. Go ahead. John Huntsman is Mormon as well, but you're saying nothing has been said about him in particular. He's not a, so he's, yeah, he's not been under as much attack as a result, I'm sure. Any other thoughts? So, yeah, so it's not politically correct, this guy. Spaster's statement's not politically correct. As a result, has been judged as judgmental. Isn't that always an interesting thing, right? Judged as judgmental. Those walking contradictions, like, how dare you be so judgmental? It's like, well, who are you to judge my judgmentalism, right? Go ahead, Bryn. He says it's through his relationship with Rick Perry. He was actually asked further about that because there was questions about President Obama as well along these lines. But so Jeffress said that he knows Rick Perry personally and knows him to be a Christian. So yes, that was, so it wasn't just an assumption on his part. He says it comes from knowledge that he knows of Rick Perry. So, yeah, so the Catholicism of JFK first got the president. So that caused a stir back in those days. Yes, so just to clarify for the recording, so the idea is that he used the term cult in reference to Mormonism and that word itself has kind of become a pejorative for many people. It means something more than just even what the simple theological term necessarily communicates. Yes. Okay, so he says, He says, first of all, I mean, he describes it as a, yes, he says, the Southern Baptist Convention, largest Protestant denomination in the world, has officially labeled Mormonism a cult. And then after that, he says that, you know, you should prefer Christian leaders to non-Christian ones. He says competent Christian leaders versus competent non-Christian leaders. And then he says, and then he was asked, how he could make this statement when Mormons say that they are Christians. He's asked a question and Jeffress responded, a lot of people say they are Christians, but they do not embrace historical Christianity. I believe as Christians, we have the duty to prefer and select Christians as our leaders. That's what the first justice of the Supreme Court said. Were you saying something else, Jackie, over there? So this caused some massive waves. Because like we mentioned here, I think that the term cult was one of the big ones and a lot of other connotations for them. And so when asked about the appropriateness of this evaluation, Jeffress explained this to be a matter of definition rather than a matter of insult. He was put to task because the LDS church claims that fundamental to their religion is belief in Christ as Savior and Redeemer. Each of these truths points to the fact that Jesus Christ is the only way that we can return to live with our Heavenly Father. And by the way, return to live with our Heavenly Father is also an interesting phrase if you know anything of the eschatology and understanding of our both pre-existence as well as the eternal state, that we were spirit babies at once with our Heavenly Father, then come down to earth united with human bodies for a time of moral testing to then ascend back and perhaps be exalted to the status of a god. We'll talk more about this later on but notice how those words are very subtle there but even return to your heavenly father to me just sets off some red flags knowing what they believe. Yes. Yeah, what's the problem? Exactly. They'd read that and say, what's the problem? So Anderson Cooper from CNN was interviewing Jeffress about all of this. And he asked him, why would you vote on the, and this is such an interesting statement. There's a group back and forth. You can go look this up. You can, you can find the whole little like 10 minute interview. But he asked this question and I found this question to be so, uh, illustrative of the day we live in. He says, why would you vote on the basis of the closest, most core held religious beliefs of these two men? They both believe in Jesus Christ. They both believe in their faith. And you yourself say are good people. So that's an interesting statement. He asked the question, why would you make your vote on who's going to be President of the United States or the Republican nomination for President of the United States on the basis of his most core beliefs? I'm just like, what? So we don't care about a person's most core, most personal, most relevant belief, you know, the rest of their life. Why should that matter? That's what he's asking. Why should that matter? Actually, they mean the same thing. Exactly. Exactly. On government. Right. That's a great point. So Bill's saying that a theological belief system, if it has a belief, specific set of beliefs on government, that could have direct implication on the way they govern. Right. If I believe in concert with this belief system, then their belief on government will impact my governing. Yes. Yeah well you know you mentioned polygamy. I wonder on things like that how much longer marriage can be to anyone you want. If it's already removing distinction of one man and one woman if it can be if there's discussions continued discussions about same gendered marriage unions then you know what what does become the standard anymore for what is marriage. Yes go ahead. Right. Yeah, you give ground and it doesn't ever satisfy the sinful rebellion. It just continues to push forward. If anything, it energizes the rebellion further. It's like, I've heard some people saying that, you know, when they repealed like, you know, don't ask, don't tell, these kinds of things. And all of a sudden, before you know it, now all of a sudden, well, what's the distinction? And they should be afforded all the same rights and privileges as anyone else. And so pretty soon you're, yeah, it just gets worse and worse. But what I found so interesting is just that, you know, this reporter, is perplexed about why anyone would allow to influence their voting decisions would allow how someone's core most, this is exactly, I replayed it several times to make sure I wrote it down exactly as he said it. He said, why would you vote on the basis of the closest, most core held religious beliefs of these two men? I just go like, why wouldn't you? Yeah, the Anderson Cooper. Absolutely. Absolutely. I'm not saying he's some religious paragon for sure, but you're right. But I just feel like, you know, he's speaking something that's probably very much present in our culture. It's kind of this disconnect that people have when they consider values in our postmodern world. It's just very much like, well, how will that immediately affect me? If I don't see an immediate effect on me, then what does it matter? I mean, that's kind of the way that it ends up getting pushed. He then ended up asking Jeffrey to defend why a man's most core beliefs should be considered when selecting a leader in the country, since when did a man's most close, sincere beliefs not impact his decision making? That's the point I would want to make. He's like, what happens to the days of men of principle and that their decisions were based on principles that were birthed out of religious conviction, out of values? It's like, hey, yeah, you could really open up the personal life of the individual and get a good idea of how they would handle themselves. A man's character was more important than any particular statement he made to any particular group. So it seems like we're so far from those days. And the media storm is just proof that defending truth against lies and heresies is not welcomed in our world. To put forward something that this is true and then by that statement say that is false is not welcomed in our world. They're fine with you putting forward your belief. As long as you also allow enough room for every other belief even if those beliefs are completely contradictory to your own. Remember we believe when it comes to tolerance that we're not we don't force someone to be Christian you can't make them a Christian. So we would tolerate someone else's view in the sense of when I go to. do something against them, right? We're not gonna abuse them or hurt them or force them in some way. But the word tolerance today is meant in a totally different meaning, right? To say that all views are equally valid, and that we cannot stand for, and it really is the breakdown of pretty much all discussion, all knowledge, any of that. So it really doesn't hold up, and that's the problem with postmodernism we've talked about before. So the appeal to a standard OK, so the outrage that the Mormon assertion that they are. So there's outrage that that the Mormon assertion that they are Christians should be denied by others. I mean, that's that's the issue. We we shouldn't be able to deny someone else who claims to be a Christian. If they claim to be a Christian, you should not doubt that. Otherwise, you're being judgmental. And so the appeal to a standard for defining genuine Christianity is not only ignored, But it's abhorred. So anyone who says no Christianity actually is something that can be defined and described. And if these things are not present it's not genuine Christianity. That's not the way our world wants to work. Our world wants to work. I can call whatever I believe Christianity and I can make it up as I go and just still call it Christianity because somewhere in there I say something about Jesus. I mean, something about Jesus, something about Christ, something about God. As long as those words are in there, you see how Anderson Cooper played this. He's like, well, you believe in Jesus, you believe in God, you believe, you know, you believe. And then he goes, well, what's the difference? You guys must all be Christians. Yes, go ahead. Right. That's right. You know, it's interesting. One of the statements that Jeffries, Jeffress makes in response to him is to say, he goes, you know, I'm sure you wouldn't be offended if I said you were not a Republican. He's like, the Republican has a certain sort of, and you're like, well, how do you know what I am? You did say that. But his whole point is to say, like, you know, I'm just, it's definitional here. I'm saying, theologically, it's a cult. And he's trying to, he's trying to defend exactly what you were saying, Bill, and probably where he got into some trouble. He threw out a term like that, and you really have to establish the definition for it. And perhaps there are times when it's not even worth using the term just because of what's happened. You try to recapture the meaning of terms, and that's great too, but sometimes you have these kind of situations where they just play off of these other meanings that they're trying to attach to it. But it's in the midst of counterfeit Christianities that knowing the respective beliefs of nature perversions of the truth is so important. And that's why it was this idea that really re-energized me for what we're doing here. We need to be able to articulate why is it something goes well Mormon say they're Christians. We should be able to articulate to them why they are not. This guy was given an opportunity to do so. Jeffress was. And so he ended up mentioning Joseph Smith. He mentioned some other scriptures that Mormons hold to. But there might be a couple of more fundamental things I would have mentioned if given the opportunity to distinguish between Mormonism and Christianity and why it is that I believe Mormonism is not at all Christian. So we need to demonstrate the particulars of what makes a cult a cult. What makes a false religion a false religion. And so that's what we're doing right now trying to provide straightforward answers regarding the genuine gospel especially to a world that's asking questions like well what is the difference. I mean Mormons are some Mormons are claiming to be Christians. What's the difference when you and them. So we need to be able to do this. And I think one of the most fundamental places and probably where we should start with all of this even though we're halfway through our study is theology proper. Who is God. If there's anything fundamental about a belief system it's how do you define God. What comes to your mind when you think about God and toward the final months of Joseph Smith's life. He taught what were to be his at that point his final kind of some of his final statements on the doctrine of God and man. It wasn't only a few months later that he would die. Remember that shootout at that. jail where he had been in prison for a little bit time. It's perhaps nowhere more evident that Smith's doctrinal convictions were under flux and evolution than a comparison of the statements that he made in 1844 shortly before his death. and statements that are found in the Book of Mormon which is we remember it was published in 1830. So between 1830 and 1844 there are some serious evolution in the thinking of Joseph Smith. And remember when we talk about the Book of Mormon this is one of the problems to setting the Book of Mormon is that there are times in which the Book of Mormon is at variance at outright contradiction with the scriptures with the Bible. And then there are other times for the Book of Mormon is that flat contradiction. with the Pearl of Great Price and the Doctrine and Covenants and other writings and teachings by Joseph Smith and the apostles of the Mormon Church. So the Book of Mormon isn't. isn't biblical because it fails tests in being compared to the scriptures. But it's also not Mormon enough in some senses because latter day revelation coming from the Mormon Church is in contradiction to what the Book of Mormon teaches. Remember with this. We looked at some statements where there's some almost like flatly Trinitarian statements found in the Book of Mormon. Even remember the testimony of the three witnesses that starts off the Book of Mormon. At the end of that there's a Trinitarian statement there. It's as plain as day. And meanwhile, present present Mormon teaching on the nature of God is not at all Trinitarian. And this is where I come to this fundamental thing. Here's the question. How do you know that Mormonism is not Christian? You just say this Mormons are polytheistic. That's it. You say that statement. It's completely definitional at that moment. Is there one God or are there many? I don't know how much more fundamental you can get to a religious belief system than that. Is there one God? Or are there more than one God or many gods? Christianity is monotheistic. Mormonism is polytheistic. And this is seen so clearly from the last word from the last words of Joseph Smith. This came in his. King Follett funeral discourse and there are Mormons will point out and say hey that's not in the Book of Mormon. OK fine. But you will see that what Joseph Smith ends up teaching is born out in the Doctrine and Covenants in the pulpit price and in later writings by apostles and leaders within the Mormon church. So regardless of whether or not it's in the scriptures they teach this as doctrine. This is what the church stands for. So. If there's any doubt about this, I think if there's any doubt about whether or not Mormonism is Christian, is a Christian religion or not, I think these following words from Joseph Smith clears up, removes all doubt. Listen to what he says. I will prove that the world is wrong by showing what God is. I am going to inquire after God, for I want you all to know him and to be familiar with him. God himself was once as we are now. and is an exalted man and sits enthroned in yonder heavens. That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today and the great God who holds the world in its orbit and who upholds all worlds and all things by his power was to make himself visible, I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form. Like yourselves in all the person, image and very form as a man for Adam was created in the very fashion, image and likeness of God and received instructions from and walked, talked and conversed with him as one man talks and communes with another. And note, Joseph Smith here is speaking of God in exceedingly tangible ways, and that's purposeful God. The father is actually just an exalted man. He's a superman. He's an exalted man, but he is a man, according to Mormon theology. He claims that the biblical testimony to us having been created in God's image. Did you note that he claims that this necessitates that God must be a man, that if we were made in God's image, then God must be a man in order for us to be men made in his image. And Smith continues. It is necessary we should understand the character and being of God and how he came to be so. I'm like, yeah, you're absolutely right. We know who God is. Sure. I'm going to tell you how God came to be God. Our red flag should always be going off in our heads, right? So there's some point in which God was not God. And now I'm going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and suppose that God was God from all eternity. Yes, that's what the Bible says. I will refute that idea and take away the veil so you may see. These are incomprehensible ideas to some, but they are simple. Maybe they're incomprehensible because they're falsehood. It is the first principle of the gospel. Listen, the statement is the first principle of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of God. And to know that we may converse with him as one man converses with another, and then he was once a man like us. Yea, that God himself, the father of us all, dwelt on an earth the same as Jesus Christ himself did, and I will show it from the Bible. Here, then, is eternal life to know the only wise and true God. And you've got to learn how to be gods yourselves and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all gods have done before you. Namely, by going from one small degree to another and from a small capacity to a great one, from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead and are able to dwell in everlasting buildings and to set in glory, as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power. What is it? to inherit the same power, the same glory and the same exaltation until you arrive at the station of a God and ascend the throne of eternal power, the same as those who have gone before. Now, let's just pause there for a moment. Is there any doubt in your mind about whether or not Mormonism is Christian? Yeah. Let's talk about it a little bit. What's what's problematic with this popcorn with this little bit. Bring you got thoughts. Spiritual evolution. Yeah. Very good. You have eternal progression. What. Yeah. Yep. The matter of fact I have heard and I have to confirm this. Somebody had talked to me just the other day and had been talking with a Mormon. Now this Mormon might have been incorrect so I'll have to check into this. But I was told that they actually take a whole different take on the temptation and fall of man in the garden. Have you heard about this? Maybe you were talking about this? Fall is actually a good thing. Yeah, that Satan is actually telling the truth. That you're going to become A God, you know, this God's trying to prevent you from becoming God. And so he's letting us in on the mystery that we can actually become God. So you see how that's completely flip flopped from our view of what's going on there in the garden. Yes. And they take that as if that's the truth rather than a lie. Right. Yes. So this goes back to yes exactly. Now we get to know you to some degree on who Satan is and who Jesus is and we're we're we're going to save Christology for next time. We're probably two weeks from today because we're not get through all this today. But but we are talking specifically about what do they believe about Jesus because that's also obviously very very important here. But yes so you then you start to get into this discussion of who is Satan and what's his relationship in regards to Jesus and all the rest. So so we ask Steve. Yes, yes. The idea of eternal progression is also part of their belief system. So so men become if you if you go through the right process, you become a god. And then if you've been married to a woman through the temple rites and everything, it's very particular. I was even reading this in the Doctrine and Covenants. I was reading this where it's very, very particular, like it has to be in the temple ceremony. It has to be done the right way and all the rest. But it's possible done right. then yes you can have these you have this celestial union and have spirit babies and all the rest. Yes yes everyone every every God is was once a man who. Yes exactly. And don't they even add infinite item. So it just goes on for eternity. And by the way just so you understand like that's one of the biggest problems besetting beliefs like naturalism is The idea of ad infinitum regression, an infinite succession of moments before this one, is incomprehensible philosophically. Because if there's an infinite number of moments before this one, then you never get to this one. So philosophically, there has to be a beginning. And that's why even you have these ideas of Big Bang and all the rest, where all of a sudden, you know, when this infinitesimal speck or whatever, you know, massive, hugely massive infinitesimal speck explodes, wherever it came from, we don't know. But anyway, all of that is still based on this idea that there was some starting point. And so one of the problems even here for Mormon theology is their infinite regress before now of this cycle, it literally is an irrational, incomprehensible sort of doctrine. But yet, that's what they purport. So, yeah, every God to like a God of this planet now was once a man who once served a God, but had gone through children of this God of God. Yes. No. Yeah, because here's the deal is that they have they have spirit children, so the gods This is great. So the gods are men, they're exalted men. Right. So they have a physical. I mean, he's really tangible here, real physical. Right. But the production of their of their union is spiritual babies, physical union, spiritual babies who are then. So all of us had a preexistence before now. And then we were united with bodies here on the earth for a time of moral testing. sent down from heaven into families. But your knowledge of your pre-existence is erased somehow through the process. You don't remember your pre-existence. Correct. All of us are ultimately the origination of these gods. So now I said to take exception because this statement by Joseph Smith is a part of the official scriptures but just to show you that this is in keeping with the teachings found in the scriptures in the D.N.C. chapter 130 section 130 verse 22 says this the father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as a man's. The Son also, but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us. So for whatever reason, they believe the Holy Spirit is the personage of spirit, but the Father and the Son both have tangible bodies, flesh and bones as tangible as ours. Okay, Bernie. That's one. Yeah. So this is I agree with you completely Brin here. This is one of those discrepancies really hard to deal with sometimes though with Mormons is that they'll claim the scriptures plus modern day revelation given through the apostles and leaders Mormon church. But then when you try to nail down any particular leader and what they might say a lot of times you retreat away from what they said to the scriptures to their scriptures. you actually would think that if anyone was afforded this kind of gal unilateral authority of the justice net I really feel it is somewhat akin to the discussion we had about the papacy when we talked about Roman Catholicism where you're infallible except when except in all these exceptions you know. And so conveniently infallibility no longer means what it could be useful to me like you actually provide infallible guidance and counsel to the church. Oh man that sounds like a wonderful deal if he's actually able to provide that he's actually been given that. But then when it comes down to practical Practical you know day-in day-out stuff any time this stuff could be this about it's not really because he wasn't you know Speaking ex cathedra or whatever until some people it's just limited down to like two occasions. That's it when he announced his own Infallibility when he said something about the Immaculate Conception about Mary right so oh, then you just go You know do you have this Pope and you have this church is supposed to clear up all the cobwebs that Protestants have to deal with because we don't have this You know, you know this uniform body can just authoritatively say this is the interpretation but when it comes down to a specific interpretation of any text It's squishy. You can't ever get them to come down. And what does it actually mean? So I feel the same kind of thing going on here with the with these. I feel in the sense Mormons are similar to Roman Catholics in their appeal to these authority structures. You know, the Roman Catholics get it from this idea of the succession, Peter's succession, right, with the pope. And here at the Mormons is a similar sort of succession going on with their modern day apostle. or prophets. But then when you come down to it you go well this is a prophet right. Yes this is an apostle. Yes. Well he said this. Well it's not. And the thing is that there's apostles that completely contradict each other. So at some point you just go if the apostles actually can't provide infallible counsel and direction then what good are they. What kind of apostle is that. It's very, it's a very difficult thing. So that's why I say, Bryn, just to cover all bases in case it goes, well, that wasn't enough. Well, the Doctrine and Covenants says very plainly exactly what Joseph Smith said, and that is part of their official scriptures. Right. Yeah. That's the issue is there really was I think undeniably the case that there was an evolution in Joseph Smith's own beliefs. And so the Mormon church has a whole lot of inconsistencies introduced because you see him progress in his own theological viewpoint. And so he lives for a certain number of years and so you can see the discrepancy between early years and latter years in his life. So it's quite plain Joseph Smith's sermon is his latter belief in polytheism. And this is certainly a massive distinguishing mark between Christianity and Mormonism. This is why the claim that Mormons are Christians is false. Christianity is monotheistic, while Mormonism is polytheistic. Just a few weeks later, after he would make that sermon, Joseph would say, quote, I have always declared God to be a distinct personage. Jesus Christ, a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a spirit. And these three constitute three distinct personages and three gods. There it is. Now, obviously, it goes on beyond just those three gods. to many other gods as it happened before and will come after in their theology. But at least you have a very plain statement from Joseph Smith there. As long as he's saying three personages you're not quite sure how to handle that. We use in our Trinitarian formulation one God three persons. He can use the word personage and I think it seems to be tied to his latter reflections on supposedly what he saw when he went out into the woods and saw supposedly by his latter reflection two personages. who he claimed to be the father and the son which becomes crucial to his a lot of his other development. So personage for him you could maybe go well maybe those same persons here are OK with three persons but then he says I've got three personages and three gods. As soon as he says that it becomes very plain. This is not Orthodox Christianity. Yes. Steve. Correct. Yeah. Moroni was it was a person. He actually was the one that penned that last book of the Book of Mormon and then hid the tablets. And so what the description is he was an angel came back. Angel quote quote is just an exalted man who didn't get to godhood which causes all kinds of questions for me like why didn't Moroni make it to godhood. He is he was responsible for this book and brings it back. Yeah. Why did he come back as a god rather than. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You know I talked to Randy this past week and he's had a lot of discussions with foreman's jobs witnesses and I think he was just commenting on is that is a really great observation. that we've been considering over the last few weeks, Joseph Smith, Book of Mormon, all the rest of this. Talking about some more today. Talking about the evolution in Joseph Smith's own thought, the contradiction between Joseph Smith's own writings. And this is all in the lifetime of one man who wrote several books, right? The late contributions are all over the place. Now, compare that with the scriptures. You read by over 40 authors over some 2,000 years. And I consider consistency of the Bible. We're not talking about just one person. It's not just one person sitting down to write a bunch of stuff. You know, this is 40 different writers over 2000 years in different places of the world, you know, several continents being represented. And, you know, there's a consistent message that's being proclaimed through the scriptures. And meanwhile, Joseph Smith can't even get it right. He's one person living in a short span of years. He can't get it all to jive all to match up. It is a really great observation because I think sometimes we forget about that distinctive with the Bible because we look at it as you know, it is a sense of unity. It's one book. It has God as its author. Right. But at the same time, God through the Holy Spirit inspired these things to be written and It happened over a couple thousand years and through several different writers. And meanwhile, look at the tremendous amount of consistency. So there's no more basic belief of a religion than whether it's monotheistic or polytheistic. Mormon apostle Orson Pratt said, quote, If we should take a million worlds like this and number their particles, we should find that there are more gods than there are particles of matter in those worlds. That's just how far extensive their belief in polytheism is. Mormon apostle Bruce McConkie wrote, three separate personages, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, comprise the Godhead. As each of these persons is a god, it is evident from this standpoint alone that a plurality of gods exists. To us, speaking in the properly finite sense, these three are the only god we worship. But in addition, there is an infinite number of holy personages drawn from worlds without number who have passed on to exaltation and are thus gods. Now, this is a statement that is so contradictory. He's trying to claim on one level of their monotheistic that they they they worship one god. But he goes, if we take that to mean three gods over this planet. So. It's really, it's playing games with terminology and he's trying, and this is the whole deception in mind here. He's like, well, if I define monotheism to be one God in the sense that there's three gods over this planet of which they're just one of an infinite number of gods, you know, a huge amount of gods all over the other places. Oh, but it's the only one we worship here if I think of three gods as one God. That's not the same as what we articulate with the Trinity. One God, three persons. We mean something very different. We're not saying three gods, one God, three persons. So again, you see the contradiction here. I agree with Joseph Smith that the first principle of the gospel is to know for a certainty the character of God. Amen. I agree with that statement. It is first principle to know the character of God, know who God is. But then how he goes about defining who God is or the gods. shows that he does not know the genuine gospel. Christians are monotheists who believe the one and only God who exists is eternal and unchangeable. He is immutable. Right. If he affirms that he does not change. There were no gods before God and there will be no gods after God. God alone is God. And I just got a few more minutes here today and I want to probably yeah I think I can finish up just a couple more statements from the LDS church so we have a good understanding of where they're landing. I want to at least throw in there that's what we believe about God. And next time we're going to do is we're just going to go through a bunch of scriptures together and just show how these are blatant contradiction with the Bible. Remember the Bible is part of their scriptures. That's also problematic for their belief system. There's just flat contradiction between all of this. For us, it's no problem. We just believe the Bible. It's Mormon prophet Lorenzo Snow who's credited with having articulated the LDS belief. This is kind of a famous one. As man is, God once was, and as God is, man may become. Catch that? So as man is, God once was. So God was once like us. And as God is, man may become. So we might become God just like God is God. This is a logical development in Joseph Smith's theology proper. If God was once a man, then man has the opportunity to become a God himself. Very, very simple, logical step. If our God was once a man, then what's to prevent us from, as men, becoming gods ourselves? And he makes that connection and it's borne out in the rest of the leaders of the LDS church. The Mormon teaching of the eternal law of progression is based on the idea that the gods who dwell in heaven from which our spirits came are themselves beings who have been redeemed from the grave in a world which existed before the foundations of this earth were laid. Catch this our world yes created by our God but he came from a world that was created by his God. So our God is in a sense creator of our world. But in a localized sense, our world, not all worlds catch it. So he's creator of our world and he's God of our world, but not of the universe, not of all worlds, because he once was on a planet and worshiped a God there. Yes. You have a hierarchy in the afterlife so you could end up serving the god of this world because you didn't become exalted to godhood yourself. But if you become exalted, that's the goal, become a god yourself, then you have your own world. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I don't know exactly how far their rites of godship extend. Again, what do they define as world is another question. Is the God of this world also the God over the solar system, or is it just the planet Earth? That's also up for discussion here. But the cycle is just always in place. Men being exalted to Godhood, reigning over their own worlds, having spirit children. Those children then being tested on a terrestrial planet like ours. The God of that planet then looks to their redemption. The goal of leading them from spirit child to mortal life to godhood. That's kind of the cycle there. Right. And this is kind of repeats itself over and over and over again. So God was once a man who progressed to his present position. Man begins his cycle when he's born of celestial parents. Talk about that pre-existence but somehow that pre-existence is like for your memory. You come to earth. convenient. Now the celestial parents have physical bodies as noted by Joseph's sermon yet they produce spiritual offspring which is another just strange oddity. So you're really concerned that these celestial gods are physical. They have bodies flesh and blood flesh and bone. But meanwhile when they have offspring their spiritual offspring. I guess why not. I just don't quite understand it. Why not just have spirit Why not just live in the spirit sense and have spirit babies who then are united? It's just it gets really, really. It doesn't make sense at all. So anyway, so so God, so the cycle is going on and then these offspring are placed into physical bodies on Earth to be tested during their mortal probation. Depending upon the decisions they make and the lives they live, they may attain to full exaltation, become gods themselves, or they may end up receiving a lesser position after death, becoming a servant of God, angel being used to describe just a servant of God. So you go into the next life as a servant of God. And I guess that's where Moroni has to land. I don't know how else to consider where he would have landed. and being confined to a specific sphere. So you're confined more. You know if you're exalted to God and you have your own sphere. Otherwise you're part of some other God's sphere. Now there has been one other thing. There's been some amount of debate regarding the longevity of this progression. Is it ever ongoing. Wilford Woodruff said in 1857, God himself is increasing and progressing in knowledge, power and dominion and will do so worlds without end. So this is a reference to the God of our world that he is presently progressing, improving, increasing all the rest. While Bruce McConkie said in 1966, it should be realized that God is not progressing in knowledge, truth, virtue, wisdom, or any of the attributes of godliness. That seems to be a flat contradiction there, doesn't it? Can I see him again? Woodruff says, God himself is increasing and progressing in knowledge, power, and dominion, and will do so worlds without end. McConkie says, God is not progressing in knowledge, truth, virtue, wisdom, or any of the attributes of godliness. And there's just a little bit over 100 years separating these two statements. If nothing else, you have the same words used in both cases. One says progressing in knowledge. The second one says not progressing in knowledge. And there's some other terms that are not completely matched, but at least knowledge is in there. So the question here is, is God continually progressing or not? And that's one that's being debated, especially when then, remember, they also have the Bible as part of their scriptures. So how do you deal with I the Lord do not change? How do you deal with with him? There's no shifting shadow. There's, you know, how do you deal with that? And so there's just some holes there. So the first guy said he is always progressing. Oh yeah, after 100 years he no longer needed to progress. He was always progressing for another 100 years until the next guy came and said, he's now made it, he's attained. And that's part of the problem is, you know, if you set up this scenario, and I'll give you just a second to stand, if you get this scenario where he's progressing to godhood, then the question becomes, once he achieves godhood, has he reached it, or is there still development going on? And that question is all the result of the finite nature of their description of God. You understand that this is not an issue for us as Christians because if God is infinite that he certainly is not progressing. For if he's somehow wiser today that would mean there was one time when he wasn't as wise. He wasn't all knowing or he wasn't you know. And if he got worse that means that he's gotten worse than he used to be. So both of those positions are untenable for Christianity. Yes go ahead Stan. Well one of the big thing I think that the crucial matter here is if we get theology proper right then everything else kind of starts to fall in the right place. It avoids some of the problems here right. So if we get down straight and correct there is one God and only one God. There's no one before him and no one after him. He's eternal. He's unchanging. He's omniscient. He's omnipotent. He's overall. He controls all. He's the creator of all. Everything that's come into being has come into being through him and nothing that's come into being has come into being except through him. Right. So so if all of this is articulated very, very plainly and clearly, then we as created beings obviously can never be God. So whatever it is that we end up describing, Stan, with us progressing in sanctification, with us being glorified with the Lord in the new heavens, new earth, all that description, if we get into that, one thing that we will not say is that we become gods because there's only one God. And to apply the term God to a creaturely thing, to a thing that is created, is a contradiction of terms. God is the uncreated. He is not created. He's always been. He has he has life in himself. He is independent. He is a deity. He has existence in himself and everything else has existence only through him. So so what I would say is whatever they want to say, well, you believe in glorification. Yeah, sure. I believe in glorification, but I'm going to be a glorified man, a glorified man, whereas God is God and he's arrayed in glory throughout all of eternity. And there's a there's a A fixed chasm between the creature and the creator. Yes. The creator creature distinction. Yes. Yes. So there's a creature creator distinction here. And can I just say this. What we see there being kind of walked out through the theology of Mormonism. Recognize this guys. It's being walked out in naturalism, in atheism. It's the same thing. Bring down God. Push up man. Exalt man. Bring down God. That is that is the lie of Satan. It's exactly what he wants to do. And he'll push that agenda through a no God belief system. You know, he'll push that agenda through a lesser God belief system. He'll push that agenda through a religious strict religious legalistic system. He doesn't care how it. package it however he pleases. As long as you buy the lie that God is less than what God is and man is greater than what man is. And that's the deal. And that really is. You can watch that throughout culture. We saw that with Josh McDowell kind of showed that with cultural trends. You can see that through everything that is the continual push. And so it's just another variety. And so we say all this to say that we care about Mormons just like we care about atheists and humanists and Jehovah's Witnesses Catholics and anyone who doesn't have a grip on the genuine gospel. And so it's just varieties of that lie. And so what we're trying to do is expose the lie and replace it. with the truth. Let me close in prayer and I'll let you guys go and if you have a couple questions we can answer those after. Heavenly Father, thank you for this afternoon and great discussion here. And please give us clarity on these matters. Thank you, God, that you alone are God. We recognize you as being the one and only God, the one who exists forever, whose existence is not dependent on any one or anything else. And meanwhile, everything, all things that are created, which is everything besides you, the uncreated one, We depend upon you for our existence and we're so thankful that you have provided your son, Jesus Christ, through whom we can have the forgiveness of sins. And that one day we who are in Christ will be glorified with you. But even then, Lord, we recognize that we will merely be glorified human beings while you are eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, holy God. Lord, help us communicate monotheism to our culture, to our world. Help us show Mormons that the Bible is monotheistic because there is only one God. And that's how you describe yourself to us. I pray that you would help us in this endeavor and that you'd bring many to salvation. I'm proud of this in Jesus' name. Amen.