Three Simple Ways to Show Contradictions in the Mormon Belief of God

[Randy_Carson]

Today, Catholic Answers published an article entitled, Three Simple Ways to Show Contradictions in the Mormon Belief of God.

Because these kinds of articles can paint a very one-sided view of another religion, I thought it would be reasonable to post the three challenges contained in the article here and then allow Mormons to respond.

+++

Three Simple Ways to Show Contradictions in the Mormon Belief of God
By Karlo Broussard
catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/three-simple-ways-to-show-contradictions-in-the-mormon-belief-of-god

Challenge #1: How can Mormons believe that God the Father has a body when the Bible says God is pure spirit?

In the Mormon book, Doctrine and Covenants, a collection of God’s so-called revelations to Joseph Smith, God the Father “has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s” (130:22). But this directly contradicts the Bible. For example, the apostle John teaches that “God is spirit” (John 4:24), and according to Jesus, spirit has no flesh or bone (Luke 24:39). The Bible also teaches that God is invisible (Col. 1:15), which implies God he doesn’t have a physical body. How can God be pure spirit and have a body at the same time?

“But,” one of them may object, “the Bible teaches that God has a body when it says Moses talked to God face to face” (a reference to Exod. 33:11). Not to worry—this no more proves God has a body than Psalm 91:4 proves God is a bird because it says he has feathers and wings: “He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust” (KJV). Just as “feathers” and “wings” is metaphorical language meant to teach us about God’s love for humanity, so too the language of Moses speaking to God “face to face” is metaphorical, and is meant to express “the intimacy that Moses had with God.”

Because they believe that God has a body, Mormons teach something else that contradicts the Bible, namely, that the Father does not dwell in man’s heart (Doctrine and Covenants, 130:3). This opposes Jesus’ teaching that he and the Father will make their home with the one who loves him (John 14:23). Jesus’ subsequent teaching on how Christians abide in him as branches abide in a vine (John 15:4-5) suggests that the residence the Father and Jesus will take is within man, which means the Father and the Son will dwell spiritually within man.

God can’t be the author of both the Doctrine and Covenants and the Bible because it would be absurd for God to contradict himself. Therefore, Mormons must choose which set of revelations they are going to believe: they can’t rationally believe both.

Challenge #2: How can Mormons believe in a plurality of gods when the Bible teaches there is only one God?

There are several authoritative Church of Latter Day Saints (LDS) sources that teach Mormons believe in a multiplicity of gods. For example, the Book of Abraham, which is a part of the LDS scriptures called The Pearl of Great Price, ascribes the act of creation to multiple gods: “And they went down at the beginning, and they, that is the Gods, organized and formed the heavens and the earth” (4:1).

The multiplicity of gods is further supported by the Mormon belief that men who faithfully follow LDS teaching will themselves become gods (called “eternal progression”). As the fifth LDS president, Lorenzo Snow, put it: “As man now is, God once was; As God now is, man may be” (Eliza Snow, Biography and Family Record of Lorenzo Snow, 46). Joseph Smith taught in his King Follett sermon (a funeral talk he gave in 1844) that men must “learn how to be gods…the same as all gods have done before” them. Smith’s successor, Brigham Young, followed suit: “The Lord created you and me for the purpose of becoming Gods like Himself” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, 93).

If there is one the thing the Bible is clear on, it’s the belief that only one God exists:

• Deuteronomy 4:39: “Know therefore this day, and lay it to your heart, that the LORD is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other.”
• Isaiah 44:8: “Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.”
• Isaiah 44:24: “I am the LORD, who made all things, who stretched out the heavens alone, who spread out the earth—Who was with me?”
• Isaiah 45:5: “I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God.”

These passages directly undermine Mormon belief. Since the belief that multiple gods exist contradicts the Bible, the Mormon has to consider whether he will continue to believe two contradictory beliefs.

Challenge #3: How can Mormons believe that God was once a man who became God, when the Bible teaches that God can’t change?

As mentioned above, Mormons believe that God the Father became God. Joseph Smith taught this himself in the King Follett discourse: “It is the first principle of the gospel to know for certainty the character of God . . . that he was once a man like us.” But if God once was a man and became God, then that implies God changed. The Bible proves this belief to be false.

Take Malachi 3:6 for example: “For I the Lord do not change.” How could God go from being imperfect to perfect, from being mortal to immortal, and not change? If one of the Mormons retorts, “Oh, but this passage simply refers to God never wavering in his faithfulness to mankind,” then quote James 1:17: “Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.”

James makes it clear that there is no change in God the Father.

 

[superwimp]

Hello Randy,
I am no longer Mormon, however, I would like to respond to number 2. Moses said God is one. While it's unclear (to me) what that means it doesn't necessarily mean there is one God. In fact the question of whether God is multiple or single may be irrelevant in describing God. This doesn't necessarily claim that the Mormon viewpoint is correct but only that your churches claim that there is one God may be meaningless in describing God.

 

[boomerang]

I’m sure the Mormons fall back on the ol’ standby - the bible we have today was not *properly *translated. That settles everything.

 

[gazelam]

I’ll take a crack at challenge #1…

Challenge #1: How can Mormons believe that God the Father has a body when the Bible says God is pure spirit?

In the Mormon book, Doctrine and Covenants, a collection of God’s so-called revelations to Joseph Smith, God the Father “has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s” (130:22). But this directly contradicts the Bible. For example, the apostle John teaches that “God is spirit” (John 4:24), and according to Jesus, spirit has no flesh or bone (Luke 24:39).

From en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_the_nature_of_God/God_is_a_Spirit

Some Christians object to the LDS position that God has a physical body by quoting John 4:24:

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. (Italics in KJV original).

Adopting a critical reading of this verse leads to some strange conclusions if we are consistent. Deuteronomy 4:28 says that our God can see, eat and smell. Can an unembodied spirit do that? Deuteronomy 4:24 and Hebrews 12:29 say that God is a consuming fire, 1 Jn 1:5 says God is light, and 1 Jn 4:4,16 says that God is love. Is He just those things? Clearly not, and the LDS conclude that neither is He just a spirit.

Note that in the KJV cited above, the word “is” is italicized. This is because the King James translators have inserted it on their own—it is not present in the Greek text from which the translation was made.

Secondly, the reader should be aware that the indefinite article (“a”, as in “a dog” or “a spirit”) does not exist in Greek. Thus, the addition of the word “a” in English occurs at the discretion of the translators. (Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, (Grand Rapids, Mich. : W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1995), 271.)

This leaves two Greek words: theos pneuma θεος πνεμα]—“God spirit”. The JST [Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible] resolves this translational issue by saying “for unto such hath God promised his spirit”. The word pneuma, which is translated spirit, also means ‘life’ or ‘breath’. The King James Version of Revelation 13:15 renders ‘pneuma’ as life. Thus “God is life,” or “God is the breath of life” are potential alternative translations of this verse.

Also, if God is a spirit and we have to worship him in spirit, do mortals have to leave our bodies to worship him?

One non-LDS work noted of this verse:

That God is spirit is not meant as a definition of God's being—though this is how the Stoics would have understood it. It is a metaphor of his mode of operation, as life-giving power, and it is no more to be taken literally than I John i. 5, "God is light", or Deut. iv. 24, "Your God is a devouring fire". It is only those who have received this power through Christ who can offer God a real worship. (*Joseph Newbould Sanders, A Commentary on the Gospel according to John, ed. B. A. Mastin (New York: Harper & Row, 1968), 148–149. ISBN 9780913573556*)

The Bible also teaches that God is invisible (Col. 1:15), which implies God he doesn’t have a physical body. How can God be pure spirit and have a body at the same time?

God is invisible to sinners, but not to the righteous. He was seen by Moses (Exodus 33:11), by Jacob (Genesis 32:30), by Abraham (Genesis 17:1), and by Stephen (Acts 7:55).

“But,” one of them may object, “the Bible teaches that God has a body when it says Moses talked to God face to face” (a reference to Exod. 33:11). Not to worry—this no more proves God has a body than Psalm 91:4 proves God is a bird because it says he has feathers and wings: “He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust” (KJV). Just as “feathers” and “wings” is metaphorical language meant to teach us about God’s love for humanity, so too the language of Moses speaking to God “face to face” is metaphorical, and is meant to express “the intimacy that Moses had with God.”

Why can’t “God is Spirit” be considered metaphorical language?

Because they believe that God has a body, Mormons teach something else that contradicts the Bible, namely, that the Father does not dwell in man’s heart (Doctrine and Covenants, 130:3). This opposes Jesus’ teaching that he and the Father will make their home with the one who loves him (John 14:23).

D&C 130:3 The appearing of the Father and the Son, in that verse, is a personal appearance; and the idea that the Father and the Son dwell in a man’s heart is an old sectarian notion, and is false.

To say “he and the Father will make their home with the one who loves him” does not mean They will dwell in the heart of one who loves Them.

Jesus’ subsequent teaching on how Christians abide in him as branches abide in a vine (John 15:4-5) suggests that the residence the Father and Jesus will take is within man, which means the Father and the Son will dwell spiritually within man.

Or it suggests that those who keep sincerely the commandments will bear much Christian fruit.

 

[gazelam]

Challenge #2: How can Mormons believe in a plurality of gods when the Bible teaches there is only one God?

There are several authoritative Church of Latter Day Saints (LDS) sources that teach Mormons believe in a multiplicity of gods. For example, the Book of Abraham, which is a part of the LDS scriptures called The Pearl of Great Price, ascribes the act of creation to multiple gods: “And they went down at the beginning, and they, that is the Gods, organized and formed the heavens and the earth” (4:1).

The multiplicity of gods is further supported by the Mormon belief that men who faithfully follow LDS teaching will themselves become gods (called “eternal progression”). As the fifth LDS president, Lorenzo Snow, put it: “As man now is, God once was; As God now is, man may be” (Eliza Snow, Biography and Family Record of Lorenzo Snow, 46). Joseph Smith taught in his King Follett sermon (a funeral talk he gave in 1844) that men must “learn how to be gods…the same as all gods have done before” them. Smith’s successor, Brigham Young, followed suit: “The Lord created you and me for the purpose of becoming Gods like Himself” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, 93).

If there is one the thing the Bible is clear on, it’s the belief that only one God exists:

• Deuteronomy 4:39: “Know therefore this day, and lay it to your heart, that the LORD is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other.”
• Isaiah 44:8: “Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.”
• Isaiah 44:24: “I am the LORD, who made all things, who stretched out the heavens alone, who spread out the earth—Who was with me?”
• Isaiah 45:5: “I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God.”

These passages directly undermine Mormon belief. Since the belief that multiple gods exist contradicts the Bible, the Mormon has to consider whether he will continue to believe two contradictory beliefs.

From FAIR Mormon: en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_the_nature_of_God/%22No_God_beside_me%22

Passages such as Isa 44:6,8 and 45:5,21 that read “no God beside me” or a variation of that phrase are traditionally interpreted by mainstream anti-Mormons as meaning that other than Yahweh no form of deity exists at all, including exalted men. This type of interpretation at first seems obvious, but after considering similar passages in other parts of scripture it is clear that this interpretation is incorrect.

For example, Isaiah 47:8-10 depicts the city of Babylon as saying:

Therefore hear now this, thou that art given to pleasures, that dwellest carelessly, that sayest in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me; I shall not sit as a widow, neither shall I know the loss of children:
For thou hast trusted in thy wickedness: thou hast said, None seeth me. Thy wisdom and thy knowledge, it hath perverted thee; and thou hast said in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me.

These passages use the exact same phrase as Isa 44 and 45, yet they certainly do not exclude the existence of any city other than Babylon. The city of Ninevah would be very upset if this were the case, as Zephaniah depicts Ninevah in Zephaniah 2:15 as saying:

This is the rejoicing city that dwelt carelessly, that said in her heart, I am, and there is none beside me: how is she become a desolation, a place for beasts to lie down in! every one that passeth by her shall hiss, and wag his hand.

Again it is clear that this phrase does not exclude the very existence of other cities. Using these parallel phrases makes it clear that Isaiah is not excluding the very existence of any other deity when he quotes Yahweh as declaring “there is no God beside me.” There are, in fact, several scriptures in the Old Testament that imply that Yahweh is in fact one of a number of Gods, albeit supreme. Compare the following passages from the KJV, NIV and ESV versions of the Bible:

• And the heavens shall praise thy wonders, O Lord: thy faithfulness also in the congregation of the saints. For who in the heaven can be compared unto the Lord? who among the sons of the mighty can be likened unto the Lord? God is greatly to be feared in the assembly of the saints, and to be had in reverence of all them that are about him. O Lord God of hosts, who is a strong Lord like unto thee? or to thy faithfulness round about thee? (KJV Psalms 89:5-8)

• The heavens praise your wonders, O LORD, your faithfulness too, in the assembly of the holy ones. For who in the skies above can compare with the LORD? Who is like the LORD among the heavenly beings [fn. Lit "sons of god(s)]? In the council of holy ones God is greatly feared; he is more awesome than all who surround him. O LORD God almighty, who is like you? You are mighty, O LORD, and your faithfulness surrounds you (NIV Psalms 89:5-8).

• Among all the gods there is none like unto thee, O Lord; neither are there any works like unto thy works (Psalms 86:8).

• God has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgment (ESV Psalms 82:1)

• God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods. (KJV Psalms 82:1)

Continued in the next comment…

 

[gazelam]

Continued…

These scriptures speak of divine beings, “gods” who are the “sons of god(s)” who are heavenly beings who dwell in the skies. These cannot be idols or false gods. Yahweh dwells among them, reigns over them, and holds judgment in their midst.
Another favorite scripture of the critics of the LDS doctrine of exaltation is Isaiah 43:10. They seem to believe it contradicts this doctrine when it says:

Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Whether this passage is referring to false idols who represent deities that do not exist, or whether it refers to real divine beings who exist alongside and subordinate to Yahweh is not crucial for responding to this particular criticism. The passage specifically says “before” and “after” Yahweh. Since Yahweh has always existed, and since He will always exist no man can ever be exalted “before” or “after” Yahweh. All men who are exalted to godhood will be contemporaries of Yahweh, and will never precede nor follow Yahweh’s existence. They will also become part of the divine council over which he presides.

Wherefore, as it is written, [the inhabitants of the Celestial Kingdom] are gods, even the sons of God (D&C 76:58).

I hope this helps…

 

[RebeccaJ]

I’m sure the Mormons fall back on the ol’ standby - the bible we have today was not *properly *translated. That settles everything.

You called it.

 

[Horton]

Deuteronomy 4:28 says that our God can see, eat and smell. Can an unembodied spirit do that? Deuteronomy 4:24 and Hebrews 12:29 say that God is a consuming fire, 1 Jn 1:5 says God is light, and 1 Jn 4:4,16 says that God is love. Is He just those things? Clearly not, and the LDS conclude that neither is He just a spirit.

 

[kimg901]

From FAIR Mormon: en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_the_nature_of_God/%22No_God_beside_me%22

Passages such as Isa 44:6,8 and 45:5,21 that read “no God beside me” or a variation of that phrase are traditionally interpreted by mainstream anti-Mormons as meaning that other than Yahweh no form of deity exists at all, including exalted men. This type of interpretation at first seems obvious, but after considering similar passages in other parts of scripture it is clear that this interpretation is incorrect.

For example, Isaiah 47:8-10 depicts the city of Babylon as saying:

Therefore hear now this, thou that art given to pleasures, that dwellest carelessly, that sayest in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me; I shall not sit as a widow, neither shall I know the loss of children:
For thou hast trusted in thy wickedness: thou hast said, None seeth me. Thy wisdom and thy knowledge, it hath perverted thee; and thou hast said in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me.

These passages use the exact same phrase as Isa 44 and 45, yet they certainly do not exclude the existence of any city other than Babylon. The city of Ninevah would be very upset if this were the case, as Zephaniah depicts Ninevah in Zephaniah 2:15 as saying:

This is the rejoicing city that dwelt carelessly, that said in her heart, I am, and there is none beside me: how is she become a desolation, a place for beasts to lie down in! every one that passeth by her shall hiss, and wag his hand.

Again it is clear that this phrase does not exclude the very existence of other cities. Using these parallel phrases makes it clear that Isaiah is not excluding the very existence of any other deity when he quotes Yahweh as declaring “there is no God beside me.” There are, in fact, several scriptures in the Old Testament that imply that Yahweh is in fact one of a number of Gods, albeit supreme. Compare the following passages from the KJV, NIV and ESV versions of the Bible:

• And the heavens shall praise thy wonders, O Lord: thy faithfulness also in the congregation of the saints. For who in the heaven can be compared unto the Lord? who among the sons of the mighty can be likened unto the Lord? God is greatly to be feared in the assembly of the saints, and to be had in reverence of all them that are about him. O Lord God of hosts, who is a strong Lord like unto thee? or to thy faithfulness round about thee? (KJV Psalms 89:5-8)

• The heavens praise your wonders, O LORD, your faithfulness too, in the assembly of the holy ones. For who in the skies above can compare with the LORD? Who is like the LORD among the heavenly beings [fn. Lit "sons of god(s)]? In the council of holy ones God is greatly feared; he is more awesome than all who surround him. O LORD God almighty, who is like you? You are mighty, O LORD, and your faithfulness surrounds you (NIV Psalms 89:5-8).

• Among all the gods there is none like unto thee, O Lord; neither are there any works like unto thy works (Psalms 86:8).

• God has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgment (ESV Psalms 82:1)

• God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods. (KJV Psalms 82:1)

Continued in the next comment…

Let us look at the time when these psalms where written. A time when there were many pagan religions that believed in many gods. You take what you want and twist these passages to fit your needs and beliefs. There is but 1 God, the Alpha and the Omega. But God comes in many forms, including man. But He is still one God. Get your head out of the b.o.m and just read the bible. Revelation tells us not to take from these words or add to them. And that is exactly what the b.o.m is. A supposed continuation or restoration. Nothing was ever lost or mistranslated. Do you really think God what let mere men corrupt His Words? No. He wouldn’t. So on the day of judgement what will you tell our Lord? That you thought you were right? That you were deceived by others or some excuse? You will not have one because you were told of His thruth yet ignored it because you would not open your heart or mind.

 

[TOmNossor]

boomerang;14565830:

I’m sure the Mormons fall back on the ol’ standby - the bible we have today was not *properly *

translated. That settles everything.
You called it.

Rebecca,
I read through Gazlem’s responses (about 4 posts mostly from FAIR and applicable to the thread). I do not think there was anything that suggested that scripture was corrupted or not “properly translated.” It was long I might have missed something, but I was looking.
In fact the CLOSEST thing to a discount of scripture contained in this thread is OF COURSE from a Catholic.

Let us look at the time when these psalms where written. A time when there were many pagan religions that believed in many gods.

Perhaps if a LDS had said this your “You called it” would have the slightest of accuracy, but alas it was a Catholic who said this!
A remarkable place here!
Charity, TOm

 

[Horton]

Rebecca,
I read through Gazlem’s responses (about 4 posts mostly from FAIR and applicable to the thread). I do not think there was anything that suggested that scripture was corrupted or not “properly translated.” It was long I might have missed something, but I was looking.
In fact the CLOSEST thing to a discount of scripture contained in this thread is OF COURSE from a Catholic.

Perhaps if a LDS had said this your “You called it” would have the slightest of accuracy, but alas it was a Catholic who said this!
A remarkable place here!
Charity, TOm

Twisting and turning words. This is what the LDS use when an absolute truth has been pointed out. When the LDS take verses of the OT or NT to prove the LDS is correct they are then corrupting the message of the bible. That is exactly what Gazelam did, he used a few verses out of context in an attempt to prove the LDS right. However he failed.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Rebecca,
I read through Gazlem’s responses (about 4 posts mostly from FAIR and applicable to the thread). I do not think there was anything that suggested that scripture was corrupted or not “properly translated.” It was long I might have missed something, but I was looking.
In fact the CLOSEST thing to a discount of scripture contained in this thread is OF COURSE from a Catholic.

Perhaps if a LDS had said this your “You called it” would have the slightest of accuracy, but alas it was a Catholic who said this!
A remarkable place here!
Charity, TOm

Both of us Catholics, who you’ve quoted, understand the context of Mormon posts. You know, the teachings behind what Mormons say. But you already knew this, because you know them too.

“The eighth article of faith says, “We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.” In Joseph Smith’s day, the word translate didn’t just mean to take something from one language into another; it also could mean to transfer, convey, interpret, or explain.” lds.org/new-era/2015/09/to-the-point/what-does-the-eighth-article-of-faith-mean-when-it-says-we-believe-the-bible-to-be-the-word-of-god-as-far-as-it-is-translated-correctly?lang=eng

 

[RebeccaJ]

…but if you want to stick to translate as people use it today. Weird Greek translation conversations and providing Mormon writings that Mormonism view as clarifying faulty Bible translation, is what FAIR does.