Can You Believe, What Mormons Believe?

I’ve had hundreds of conversations with Christians from various denominations. I love these conversations. Whether it’s a perfect stranger or a long time friend, I always leave the conversation wondering why this person isn’t LDS. Based on their core beliefs, it becomes evident that many Christians already believe what Mormons believe.

Let me explain.

When I was a missionary I’d sometimes stand on a person’s doorstep and ask them if I could share a message about how families can be together forever. They’d almost immediately reply “oh yeah…I already believe that.” The dialogue continues:

[ME] “Oh awesome…so you’re LDS?”

[PERSON] “Oh heck no…I’m Christian.”

[ME] “So where did you learn this? Does your church teach that you’ll be together with your family after this life?”

[PERSON] “No they don’t teach that…but I just feel like I’ll be with my family in the next life.”

[ME] “So if you don’t believe what your church teaches about such an important doctrine..then why do you go to that church?”

[PERSON] “Well…because I really like the pastor and my friends go there.”

[ME] “What if your pastor moves out of state?”

[PERSON] “Then I’ll find another pastor here locally.”

[ME] “What if I told you there was a local church that taught that families could be together forever?”

[PERSON] “I’m not being Mormon. I’ve got to go now. Have a nice day!”

Normally the door shuts at this point, and I’m left in a quandary. “Why”… we ask ourselves. “Why do so many people believe the doctrines of the LDS church and yet close the door on the possibility of joining the church?”

member-missionary-work-576148-print

On the topic of the family unit in the next life, a believing Christian almost always “feels” or “believes in their heart” that they will still be with their husband, wife, and children in the next life. Why do they feel that way when they’re taught the opposite in church on Sunday? What is it that transcends the teachings of their pastor that causes them to “feel” that way.

Do you remember when Christ taught in John 14:26 that the Holy Ghost would “bring things back to your remembrance?” Well…the things that are being brought to your remembrance are the things you knew before you came to earth. You knew that you’d have the opportunity to live with your family in the next life which is why the concept seems so “built-in” to your conception of an after-life. That’s why you might “feel” like the family unit will endure forever instead of the oft quoted “til death do you part”.

[Tweet “”Together forever feels better than til death do you part””]

I had a pastor friend of mine that was well versed in the scriptures and in the writings of the early Christian Fathers. I shared our version of the “the fall” from straight out of 2 Nephi in the Book of Mormon. He said it was the best explanation of the fall he had ever heard. He used it to teach his congregation about the fall…without disclosing the source from which he was teaching. We had some good laughs about that, but still…it left me in a quandary.

Why was it impossible for him to share the source of his teachings with a Christian congregation? Because “Mormons are nuts” in the minds of the masses and he’d lose all credibility. And yet the doctrine! The doctrine is so pure and “feels” so right.

A couple nights ago I was watching a Christian movie called “God’s Not Dead”. Despite all of the one star reviews you’d see if you “Googled” this movie, it’s one of my all time favorites. Maybe I’m weird. Either way…I found a verbal exchange in this show really intriguing.

[adinserter block=1]

Close to the end of the movie, atheistic reporter Amy Ryan learns that she has cancer and she bursts into a room where the Christian band “The Newsboys” are warming up.

She shakes their hands and introduces herself. The dialogue between Amy and lead vocalist Michael Tait caught my attention.

[AMY] “In a few minutes…you guys are gonna go out there and sing about God…and Jesus…as if they’re as real as you and me. How can you do that?”

[TAIT] “To us…they are as real. As a matter of fact…even more so. We exist in the here and now. They’ve existed forever…think about that.”

This is one of the most well known Christian bands on the planet and probably one of the most well known Christian movies on the market today. I keyed into how quickly they referred to Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ as “they“. This is a common occurrence for most Christians that I talk to. They slip into the language of Mormonism as if it was native to them.

Ask a Christian if they believe in the Trinity. Most of them will say yes. Then ask them if they believe that Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ are two separate beings. Most of them will say yes again. The Trinity teaches that they’re only one being. So…why do so many people “believe in their heart” that the Father and Son are two beings despite what they’ve been taught about the Trinity?

It’s because their spirit knew God before they came to earth and they had a knowledge of these Biblical truths. (Jer 1:5, Job 38:7)

Their inner most spiritual feelings transcend earthly teachings. The Holy ghost brings it to their remembrance from long ago…and deep down…that is what they believe.

The same goes for many other core doctrines such as the importance of doing works or determining whether the heavens are opened or closed. We could look at almost any LDS doctrine and if it’s properly explained and placed into context, most people will nod their head and agree.

[adinserter block=2]

So why don’t more people give Mormonism a second look?

Stigma. Some people live their entire life subconsciously agreeing with LDS doctrine while consciously choosing to leave the LDS church alone.

I love Christians of every denomination. I love to go to their churches and learn about their beliefs. I love their sermons and their bands. This is not a knock on Christians at all. It’s an observation that has always made me wonder why more people don’t find their way into the LDS church when they already believe what Mormons believe.

 

Lemonade Stand

Lemonade Stand helps businesses around the world grow by building high quality custom websites with transparent internet marketing services and measurable results.

Find Out More

Build Then Bless

Build Then Bless® is a first-of-its-kind cultural operating system for your business or organization that has the power to transform your people and truly change the world.

Join Our Waitlist

28 thoughts on “Can You Believe, What Mormons Believe?

  1. Danny Rasmussen

    Good stuff, Greg. If folks were able to experience a blind “taste test” of religions, way more people would favor Mormonism than currently do. Thanks for sharing!

        • Chandler R

          So true, Stacey! This is why the LGBTQ community is having such a hard time getting fair and equal treatment when it comes to marriage – Satan is fighting the winning team!

          • Robbie

            Chandler R…LGBT is getting legalised everywhere…and more “rights” to come…and are coming virtually everywhere and by the week…:)

      • Michael Josey

        The word “Mormon” has a stigma for many reasons. The only way to get over that stigma is do denounce all of the problems of the past. And there is plenty. But Mormonism cannot denounce so many of these things because these problems are part of their fundamental make-up and by denouncing them, you denounce the foundational claims you profess as “true”. You will always have a tough time doing this and will always cry foul when “the world” looks at you sideways. That’s why Mormons are trying so desperately to be more Christian. If you took all the things that cause this “stigma” out of Mormonisn the ball game you are left with is Christianity. That’s the different ballgame. So why not just avoid the stigma and worship Christ and accept that his grace is sufficient and not doubt him? I just don’t understand the Mormon way of thinking. Sorry.

  2. Ender Wiggin

    Always a pleasure to read your thoughts Greg. Thanks for another eloquent explanation of the similarities we all share as believers in Christ.

  3. Nick B

    Mormonism is Christianity 2.0. It’s easy to make logical improvements to an old problematic system of beliefs. In the same way it’s not hard to improve the Ford Model T in 2015. That’s why I don’t give Joseph too much credit (although it did take balls).

    I couldn’t help but smile at the leap you made about our souls knowing God before we were born as an explanation for why Christians say “They” rather than “Him”. First of all, many Christians do say “Him”, but even when they say “They”, isn’t it more likely a natural result of how the human mind works? The Trinity isn’t logical, so it tends to trip everyone up when trying to describe it. Joseph’s beliefs about the Godhead makes more logical sense (but that doesn’t make it true). In other words, you don’t need to resort to a pre-mortal life (which there is no evidence for) to understand why Christians talk like this. Occam’s razor.

    The same applies to why many non-Mormons of various religions believe they will see their family and friends after this life. Some have “holy books” to back them up, others don’t. I think its obvious that humans are scared of death. Thanks to our genetic makeup we hope for another life and naturally want to be around our loved-ones. This tendency for wishful thinking provides comfort. It “feels” right for this reason. Again, you don’t need to resort to a pre-mortal life to explain why people believe this… all you need to point to is the structure of this life (which may be the only one we have, so make it count).

    In addition to making false promises about eternal sealing power (which can be comforting), the LDS church harms families by threatening separation. If one or more members of the family don’t exactly follow the LDS script (which describes the majority of families I know), the faithful members are taught they will be separated for eternity after death if they can’t bring them back into the fold. Not only does this create pain and guilt, it also ruins their hope for what the Celestial Kingdom will be like… effectively turning heaven into a kind of hell. Only the most fundamentalist mind-controlling religions teach stuff like this.

    I believe in the sausage principle. If you want to continue believing a church is divine, don’t look at how it was made. Christianity has the luxury of being established before the printing press, so its history is clouded. I think Christians have a hard time jumping on the LDS bandwagon because, despite some improvements in doctrine (which you pointed out), the LDS church is much easier to disprove because it’s history and scripture is so well documented and falsifiable. The “stigma” is justified.

    Enjoyed reading your post.

  4. abitofthisandthat

    “so many people believe the doctrines of the LDS church and yet close the door on the possibility of joining the church?” Most people are “good” in that they don’t want to harm others. A lot of people don’t want to join because there is no evidence (especially archeological) that supports the BoM. The BoM, nor any religion/holy book, has a monopoly on being a “good” person. I can be a decent human being without accepting some of the outlandish stories peddled by religion in general.

    • Broken bose

      As a Catholic, there are many things that I find problematic with the LDS faith (as I’m sure Greg and others know from my posts here). But there’s one thing I do believe we agree on, and that’s the existence of absolute truth. Such as: it’s always wrong to torture children, or rape is always wrong no matter what a society believes or practices.

      So let me give you a scenario and ask you a question.

      In China, it’s considered acceptable to let your new baby girls die of exposure since girls have no cultural responsibility to take care of their aging parents later in life (and there’s nothing like a competent social security system over there, especially for the millions that reside in the large rural areas). It’s a boy’s responsibility to care for his older parents. So they let the boys live. In this system, the parents are cared for later, and the boys are cared for now. The girls are only a problem if they are allowed to live and consume resources.

      If God doesn’t exist, then why would this be wrong? And why should I (or the parents of Chinese baby girls) regard any of your personal thoughts as anything more than your opinion?

      • Dwight Reid

        That is the most easily answered question on the page Broken bose. In the bible God doesn’t like the way his kids turned out so he drowned them. Maybe that is where the Chinese got the idea. There are places where the bible not only fails to denounce slavery but establishes the price. Murdering the firstborn of Egypt is espoused by God. In the bible a rapist can marry his victim if he pays for her. It is the bible that allows any atrocity you can imagine. What kind of morality is that. Without God we mostly just follow the Golden Rule because we have seen that mutual respect is the best guarantee of civility. There are prisons full of men who violate that code but less than one % are atheists. Most are Christian.

        • Broken bose

          Thanks for your response.

          Regardless of your repugnance for the Bible–my question isn’t really in regard as to why the Bible is right, but really why what occurs to baby girls in China is wrong. The fact that you are arguing FOR an arbitrary moral code citing the Bible doesn’t make the Golden Rule you use any less arbitrary. (So honestly, why should anyone listen to you regarding why the Bible is wrong?)

          If murdering someone (to take care of me in my old age) benefits me, than why shouldn’t it be a viable option? Why should the Golden Rule guide my actions if by ignoring it, I can personally benefit? Do you, as an atheist have any reason to regard anything as absolutely wrong?

          If you can’t, then from what moral authority can you argue that the Bible or Christianity is wrong?

          • Dwight Reid

            How can you cite the bible as proof that moral absolutes come from God. According to the Christian bible it is fine to drown your children if they displease you. God did it, what can be wrong if the Chinese do it as well? How do we teach our sons that rape is wrong when God ordered his people to rape. In another place God prescribes that if a man rapes a virgin he can pay her father 50 pieces of silver for the loss of value that the father suffered and then the rapist may take the victim as his wife and continue to rape her for the rest of her life. These are not the moral absolutes that I want my children, or the children of anyone else, to learn. Moral absolutes are simple and have been spoken and written long before your bible existed. They are as simple as do unto others as you wold have them do unto you, harm no innocent person or simply, exhibit kindness in all things.

            I neither want nor need the morality of a God who was willing to gamble with the devil himself over the righteousness of Job, allowing death and destruction in the process. Why do you?

          • Broken bose

            Hi Dwight,

            Please note that in my last reply, my points weren’t focused on showing why the Bible is right. My point was the fact that you haven’t established why those who hold that the Bible is right, are wrong in an absolute sense. I’ve purposely refrained from answering your questions on why or how you’ve misinterpreted the Scripture references in your last reply because I think you’ll use those answers to dodge the real question. And that question once again is, why as an atheist/secular humanist who holds that there is no absolute right or wrong, should we care what your opinion of right or wrong is? Why should anyone? If there is no higher moral determinant than one’s own opinion in the end, than ours is just as valid as yours is, no matter how personally repugnant you might find it.

            The most you could say as an atheist/secular humanist is that you don’t like our idea of what right or wrong is.

            But the idea of a “wrong” opinion is a non-sequitur in atheism/secular humanism, since all opinions are of the same value–they only matter to the individuals who hold them, and are never wrong by definition for that individual since no greater authority for that individual exists. So your saying that Christianity is wrong is an opinion that is no more valid in atheism than my saying that Christianity is right. Why bother then trying to impeach anyone else’s opinion as an atheist/humanist? If your point is really to persuade me that Christianity is wrong then you must do so by making an appeal to an authority greater than that of one’s own tightly held opinion–which atheism/secular humanism doesn’t admit to. But you’re admitting it anyway–by saying my opinion is wrong. This is contradictory, because you are making an implicit appeal to some greater authority that can really know whether my position is wrong and yours is not. And in that admission you are invoking the existence of God, whether you like it or not, because you are borrowing from a theistic worldview that absolutes exist. This line of argument, indeed–any line of argument from an atheist to persuade anybody else of doing, or thinking, or being ‘wrong’ about anything, is ultimately destructive to an atheistic worldview. That makes you a hypocrite for trying it, but perhaps that doesn’t matter to you. Perhaps as an atheist/secular humanist, you might value being a hypocrite, since it is neither right nor wrong for you as an individual to be one. If that’s the case, then pat yourself on the back–you’ve succeeded.

        • Ndjangel

          Christ came to redeem man…and the atrocities that a fallen world had become victim of-that which you speak of in the Old testament. Yes-the Bible does speak on much-but not to condone. Knowing mens’ hearts could be evil and would commit these crimes anyway-even when told NOT to do so (Ten Commandments), it was sort of a, “Don’t do this…but since evil will be done anyway-this is how you deal with it.” But that wasn’t acceptible to God, either…hence, why He sent Christ to redeem things. And yes-God di allow many ppl to die-but the best I can figure it is for a metaphysical, immortal, immutable, omniscient divine Being, it was better to let them die in ignorance and possibly be saved for an afterlife, than to allow them to live, commit more evil, and their souls be lost for eternity. I don’t have all the answers….but did once practice paganism myself, and found nothing quenched my spirit and my desire for truth the way Christ’s message of love and redemption has. The rest, I have faith, is small potatoes, comparatively-and I will learn when the time comes for me to. I wish you well, as we are all searching in this life-and those who find what they are looking for are blessed, indeed!

  5. Dorothy Marie Wood

    Wonderful article Greg. Whenever I had a problem believing the church of my youth I asked my mom “Isn’t that wrong?” She would say, “my religion is in my heart.” I believe that is the Light of.Christ always leading her to good decisions regardless of what our Earthly church people did. I was – as you say in so many words – raised Mormon by my mother… also with a wonderful man… my dad … for her eternal husband… but we were not Mormons … as we are today. Mary Wood

  6. Eric83

    With all due respect, Bro. Trimble, you don’t seem to have a good handle on what non-LDS Christians teach or believe. For starters, the traditional view of the Trinity is that the Father and the Son are indeed separate persons, so there’s nothing contradictory about calling them “they.” You’re setting up straw men.

  7. Moroni's cousin

    Greg, I have read a few of your posts. They are bland as are most Mormon discussions. Most Christians are not indoctrinated quite like Mormons are. They are not required to go to Seminary and hours and hours of church time and things like that. Mormonism does a great job of teaching their followers what to believe and where to stand. They are spoon-fed what they are taught.
    In regards to being together with families forever. Mormonism is the only religion I am aware of where the possibility exists of NOT being together as a family. Most Christians find it a given that they will be with their loved ones. When a Mormon asks, “Would you like to be with your family forever”? They type of question is like asking someone, “would you like to drink water today”? Well yes of course I would want to be with my family forever. Well yes I would like to drink water today. What if I told you that through Mormonism there is a way for this to happen? What if I told you that through Mormonism, you could drink water today? The answer is an obvious yes to both. Mormonism acts as if you can only be with your family if you choose Mormonism. That is not correct. Mormonism tries to take that away, then rap it and sell it back as a gift to humanity. It is shallow doctrine.
    In regards to speaking with Christians about what they believe, the same could be turned around on Mormons. Mormon doctrine is all over the place. Mormonism is trying it’s best to cozy up to Christians in the past 20 years and to not appear so ODD. Did Mormons know that their leaders have taught that God was once a man or not? Gordon Hinckley says that he doesn’t know that we teach that. He know what has been taught. Is he lying or misrepresenting the truth? Do prophets do that? Do your members know that Mormon leaders have taught that blacks are decendants of Cain because the devil had to have representation on the earth and that representation is through the “negro”? Do your members know that your temple ceremony is straight Masonic? Do they believe that the Almighty God would use a pagan symbols and hand shakes to get you to his presence? Really ? Seriously, really? Do your members know that Joseph “translated” the BOM using a rock he found while hunting for treasure into a top hat? Do your members know that your Prophets, Seers, and Revelators have no clue where the Book of Mormon happened? Like no clue because there is 0 archaeological evidence of any person, place, or thing having to do with those people. Based on the Book of Mormon numbers, it would be like the world not being able to find the Greeks and Romans. But of course we can find them because they are real. The example with your pastor friend is interesting because that is confirmation to you that they BOM is true. It’s a great explanation of the fall. To me, it is just a great 19th century explanation of the fall and not an explanation of the fall from Pre-Christ Christians as crazy as that sounds. Do your members know that the Book of Abraham has nothing to do with Abraham and that it is just a common Egyptian funeral text? Do your members know that polygamy was hidden from it’s members? Do they know that Joseph “married” a 14 year old girl? Do they know that Joseph sent a man on a mission and then married the man’s wife while he was gone? Do your members know where their money goes? They are told where it goes by the people that spend it, but is there any proof of actually where it goes? It seems as though you try to paint Christians as not fully understanding their beliefs when Mormons, as much as they are spoon feed by their leaders, don’t know a lot of the troubling facts about their Church.
    Why at the end of your post would you say that you love other Christian denominations? Do you not remember that Joseph Smith said that Jesus told him that they were all an “abomination”? Why would you want to be a part of any group or their service that is an ABOMINATION to God? Read the scriptures and see what else he calls an abomination and tell me if you would participate in those also and say that you like them. Or did God not really mean that? Or did he not say it?
    I realize you are preaching to the choir here and speaking in an “Mormonism is so awesome” echo chamber, so maybe my dissent is looked at how the BYU assistant football coach looks at dissenters.

    • Luman Walters

      amen!
      Like I said above. The mormons aren’t teaching eternal families. They are teaching an essentially saying “you have to join our church if you ever want to see your loved ones again”.

  8. Tim

    I applaud the effort to find common ground with traditional Christianity. I think a large portion of your confusion stems from an improper understanding of what traditional Christians actually believe.

    RE: being with our families in eternity (yes of course, but not just them, we get to be with everyone).

    RE: the Trinity (we believe in three unique persons who share one essence so of course we think the Father and the Son should be called “they”).

    I believe that we live with in driving distance. I would be delighted to buy you lunch sometime and clarify any aspect of traditional Christian belief. You can ask all the hard questions. I’ve been dialoguing with Mormons for quite some time and think I can phrase our understanding in Mormon vocabulary.

  9. Luman Walters

    I would invite you to ask yourself a question to find the answer as to why people believe in eternal families despite their church not explicitly teaching that idea.

    Firstly, the reason why people feel this way. I think this belief that people will see their families after death is something that goes deep into the human psyche. Someone from an eastern background will explain this as our human tendency to form attachment. People from a western or judaic christian background will explain that they feel this way because of some external bond that connects families.

    The question that will be beneficial is this. What if the idea that differentiates the Mormon church with regards to eternal families isn’t that they’re the only church that teaches it? What if they are actually the only church that teaches that families CANNOT be together for ever? If you go to someones door and say they can be with their families after death, they will say “i already believe that”. What you are really saying is “you will never see your family after death unless you join our church and go to our temple”.

  10. Robert Starling

    The intuitive beliefs of many Christians are indeed much closer to Mormon doctrine than what their own churches teach. But most of them don’t take the time to study what their denomination or “flavor” of Christianity actually teaches. In my conversations with Christian friends about the Trinity they often express beliefs similar to Sebellianism or Modalism, both deemed heretical by the early Christian Councils that formulated the creeds.
    For more on this read Truman Madsen’s 1974 essay in BYU Studies called “Are Christians Mormon?” David Paulsen explores it further in another BYU Studies article.

  11. Broken bose

    Thanks for your response. It is indeed, an interesting back-and-forth. I wonder if there isn’t perhaps a better “place” to continue the discussion since I am not always aware when your posts arrive or when mine are sent or read. Let me know if you have a solution.

    To your response:

    I recognized Sam Harris’ thesis in your argument from his book, The Moral Landscape. I have also listened to and watched many of his debates in the past. However, the book and your reliance on his arguments don’t work (as many other atheists admit to) because there is no ultimate justification as to why the well-being of others should be maximized while suffering should be minimized. If you look closely, the ‘why’ and ‘should’ arguments here are really just assumed. Even if well-being is maximized while suffering is reduced, there is no real intrinsic property to either well-being or suffering that make them necessary moral imperatives. In fact this is exactly the point that even renown philosophical atheist David Hume admitted to when persons like Harris resort to what Hume and other atheists referred to as the “naturalistic fallacy”. Here, Hume long before Harris, conceded that no amount of ‘ought’ can be used to determine what actually ‘is’ in the real world. So you and Harris are really begging the question by assuming that ‘well-being’ is or ‘should’ be a factor in determining the ‘rightness’ or ‘wrongness’ of any given moral choice. It simply doesn’t, anymore than anything else does within an atheistic ‘moral’ framework. Well-being then is simply assigned a moral value because there is nothing intrinsic about it that makes it ‘good’ by default. If it were, then Harris’ book assigning moral value to ‘well-being’ and your advocacy of it here would be entirely unnecessary. But here you are, trying to make the case. Google ‘atheists review of the moral landscape’ or ‘naturalistic fallacy’ to see just a few critiques that atheists themselves find with Harris’ work to get a better understanding of why his arguments really don’t prove morality exists within an atheistic paradigm.

    Here’s a thought experiment. Two are drowning. One is your life-long pet, whom you love dearly. The other is an old vagrant you don’t know. You only have one life-preserver to throw. Which one do you throw it to? If you save your dog, then you increase your well-being and obviously your pet’s by saving it’s life. You have also decreased suffering by minimizing it to only one living thing, instead of two–you and your dog. Which do you choose? Pet or person?

    Empathy for the vagrant and four bucks still won’t buy you a venti latte at Starbucks. But the suffering you would feel by losing your pet could last a lifetime. For the vagrant, the suffering would also be short. If you rely solely on Harris’ argument, you should choose your pet.

    In Nazi Germany, Dr. Mengele, or the Angel of Death as he was better known, experimented with frostbite victims to better understand what happens to a body when it is slowly frozen to death. So he froze many of his victims to death to get that information. We still use his information today to enhance re-warming techniques for victims of extreme cold. So by Harris’ measure, and I suppose by your own, his experiments were lauditory and moral because they have indeed increased the well-being of a great many others that would have otherwise suffered had he not performed his experiments, while minimizing suffering by only killing a few.

    Hume, Russell, and several current atheists recognize the dilemma that comes with the recognition and understanding of real external moral values. Harris gets no closer to resolving it for atheists. Unfortunately, neither do you.

    Nietsche, another cerebral atheist who runs rings around Harris in the logic department, also understood the problem when he said that when “God is dead, all is permitted”. He knew as well as do most atheists frankly that when no absolute moral law-giver exists, no absolute moral laws exists either–well-being and suffering not with-standing.

    But in your critique concerning baby girls in China, you for some reason resorted to ’empathy’ as a reason why girls in China ‘shouldn’t’ be killed even as they are by their own parents; so apparently empathy is not a great enough deterrent. They are being killed for precisely the reason you said was best–to increase their parents own sense of well-being. Their confidence in the knowledge that they will be cared for in their old age outweighs any empathy they might feel for their baby girls. Well-being, it can be said honestly, is the ultimate reason why these poor baby girls are being killed. Harris should be proud!

    So as an atheist, I’m relieved that you think my thoughts about torturing and killing babies is wrong (and can you name for me a single instance in the historical record where the torturing and killing of children was carried out by a rabbinic order? It was there in Scripture to show the severity of disobedience in context–not to kill them that showed it–and if anybody best understood that, it would be those who lived by it–not you). But as an atheist, you have no real reason to give me why that moral understanding is absolute. (and in any case, I’ll bet you’re pro-choice anyway, aren’t you? Isn’t this a contradiction? Even Christopher Hitchens realized the hypocrisy here–which was why he was pro-life–even as an atheist)

    It is ironic then that most atheists actually agree with me on the subject and understanding of external moral absolutes and the dilemma it poses to to atheists, and disagree with you.

    Not that they’re right. Since there is no right or wrong anyway according to them, or you. 😉

    I look forward to your next reply.

  12. Dylan70

    Actually the bible says he will return us to our nation’s and after noahs ark he seperated the people that all spoke one language. To different nations speaking different tongues. But your lds church teach god the father literally begot jesus and the Holy Ghost are all 3 different gods. But in the testimony of the three witnesses read the end the father the son and the Holy Ghost which is one god. If it’s one god how did joseph see two? The father and the son? Why in josephs testimony does he only say he seen the angel moroni. Let’s say we ignore apostle Paul when he says if even an angel brings you a gospel other than what has been given to you don’t believe it for it is a curse. Do we also have to ignore god said his word is forever and ever. He changes his mind a lot in your teachings. Plural marriage is an everlasting covenant. Brigham Young said if a white person should spread their seed with that of darker skin the penalty should be death on the spot and this shall always be so. I’d also have to ignore in the bible where it says if one prophecy comes to pass and that which was prophecy does not follow don’t fear it as a prophecy from god but from man. Why don’t you shed some light on the 7 known in your book of mormon and history of the church about those prophecies that didn’t come true. Including the one where joseph smith says there are men living on the moon. And I’d like to know your spin on why before 1990 they use to oath to slice their throats ear to ear open their bowels and pull out their heart before they share the secret oaths. Similar to the hand shakes to the free masons who believe in many gods. Your church teaches you can become a god. The first commandment is do not worship other gods I am the only one before and after. The second is don’t worship idols heavenly or earthly. You guys worship temples, and garments, joseph smith and the current “prophet” even though we are told that Jesus is the last prophet and he is the temple we should be worshiping. If I was to join the lds church AGAIN. I would have to ignore god and believe man.

  13. Howard

    Greg, from what I have learned about you on your website and your blogs that I have read through, you strike me as a very talented, high energy, caring person who has a genuine desire to reach out to people and engage on the important issues of our day. I think that is great. Too much of the time I am focused on my own things and do not engage.

    I became aware of your blog when my wife shared with me a facebook repost by one of her friends. (I don’t blog or even have a facebook and probably just lost all web credibility with that admission) I came to your site and looked around for a bit. It was the title to this blog caught my attention.

    Without going on for pages about my background I will sum it up in short; I grew up LDS sixth generation on every side. I defended my faith against those who would suggest that Mormons were not Christians, “just look at the name of the Church, of course we are Christians” was my usual response. Since then I have come to an understanding about what Christianity is and would now agree with someone who espoused the idea that Mormons are not Christians

    For all I know, you may not even care to engage in the question of whether Mormons are Christian (as defined by who they believe Jesus to be). I am not writing here to debate this but I would like to address what your blog suggests, that perhaps in a way some Christians are Mormons, (and may not even know it).

    You say that it seems that some (or most) human beings innately believe the doctrines of the LDS Church, yet consciously set those ideas aside when they go to a church other than the LDS church that does not teach the same things. You gave the example of the eternal family. My response to that is “unless you hate
    your family, who would not want their family to be together for eternity?” As a person, as a son, as a father, my desire is to have all of my family together in heaven in the presence of our Lord.

    I certainly agree with you that the normal response by people to the idea of an eternal family is in line with Mormon doctrine. But later in the blog you go on to say “We could look at almost any LDS doctrine and if it’s properly explained and placed into context, most people will nod their head and agree. “. That is a very carefully qualified and crafted statement and put that way, I assume, because of the doctrines that could be listed like– Eternal Progression of Man to Godhood, The Pre-existence of Human Spirits, The New and Everlasting Covenant of Plural
    Marriage, the idea that matter and energy are the Eternal and the Universe did
    not have a beginning. And the denial of a single Creator of everyone and everything that the Bible so clearly teaches. I don’t think most Christians with a basic Biblical understanding of who God is and what He has done would be nodding their heads.

    When you quoted John 14:26 you said that perhaps the Holy Spirit was bringing to remembrance memories that a person could not have. None of us were around to see and hear what Jesus did and taught, that was 2000 years ago. Jesus
    was telling his disciples that after he was no longer physically with them, the Holy Spirit would bring to their remembrance all that he said to them. We were not
    there, but the Holy Spirit did bring to remembrance those things and they were recorded in the New Testament. The New Testament does not affirm the previously mentioned doctrines of the LDS Church.

    If you are suggesting that this anecdotal “evidence” from your mission experience of what people “believe” is a testimony to some deep seeded collective memory that humanity shares, that if they are just brought to the surface they would
    somehow verify the many doctrines of the LDS Church that are not supported in
    the Bible, that is a very, very bold assertion.

    So Greg, if I could title my response it would be this; “Can You, Believe What the Bible Teaches?” Can you believe that there is one true and living God who created the Universe and everything in it. Can you believe that this God is perfect in his being and in all of his attributes. That the moral law that we all understand in our conscience originates in His holiness. That none of us can keep his law
    perfectly because of the failure our first representative Adam but, through him
    who Paul in Romans 5 calls the second Adam, another representative, the Word
    who became flesh, we can be justified by faith in the One who came to redeem a
    people and that whosoever places their trust in him for their immortal soul
    will be justified on the grounds of his perfect sacrifice, his righteousness,
    the only sacrifice that could pay an infinite debt to the one and only infinite
    Creator of the Universe. He is God, not an exalted man.

    Can you believe that we have a Creator that we will someday stand before and answer to, and that standing in our own deeds and our own “righteousness”, no matter how good we think they are, we will be found wanting in light of his perfect holiness. And can you believe that this God solved our problem by coming himself and he became our substitute on the cross in order that we would live. I challenge you to read the Bible (I’m sure you already have) but start with the Gospel of John or perhaps the letter to the Romans and read it and ponder what it says not what the LDS Church says that it says.

    I thank you for your influence and input into the many issues we are facing now in a world that is turning its back on God more and more every day, but I also want to urge you to get to know your Creator through his Word.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *