Reading Between the Clean Cut Lines, Part 2

In his “Witnessing to Mormons” post of September 27, 2008, Clean Cut, the Mormon apologist, stated, “…there is only one eternal God…there are many gods, but they are gods by grace, made so by God himself.” In my previous post, I showed that the Bible plainly teaches that there is only one God, period. There is not a central, original, eternal God who then made other “gods” as per Mormon thinking. Several passages from Isaiah were listed. See that posting for the list.

The Bible does use the words god and gods, with a small g. However, such usage is almost always in reference to false gods, or idols. The nations surrounding Israel all had false gods and idols against which God repeatedly warned. It is no wonder the word gods is in the Bible so often. Of course, those “gods” are not real gods; they are mere fabrications, first in the mind of a human and then often fashioned from wood or stone. An analogy is a false passport. It is not really a passport at all; it only attempts to pass itself off as one. It may appear to be real. However, upon closer examination it will be found phony. Some false gods exist only in the imagination of men’s minds. For example, some people believe in and worship the non-material, ethereal gods of Hinduism. The first of the Ten Commandments tells us to have no other “gods” before God. This is in reference to false gods, who merely pose as God. There is only one real God and any other “gods” are false pretenders. Neither are these false gods some kind of junior level gods that were made into gods by the one eternal God of Mormonism. Again, this is clear from Isaiah, as well as many other passages in both the Old and New Testaments.

What about the interesting statement in the New Testament, John 10:34-36, where Jesus Christ says, “Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of the God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, who the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?” Mormons often quote this passage to “prove” that men can become, and even have already become, gods.

In order to properly understand any Bible passage, one must first understand its context. This rule applies to all written works, not just the Bible. To take a passage in the Bible, or any book, and use it in disregard to its contextual meaning, is nonsense. The context of John 10:34-36 is Jesus answering His attackers who want to stone Him to death (vss. 31-33). They believe He has blasphemed by claiming to be God. (vss. 29-30). Go back to at least verse 24 and start there to see the context of this passage.

And for further context of John 10:34-36, go the Old Testament passage Jesus is quoting, Psalm 82:6 “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.” Note in verse 1 of Psalm 82 that God (the only one God) is judging the “gods.” In verse 5, He says that these “gods” are devoid of knowledge and even the ability to know. In verse 7, He pronounces a judgment of death on these “gods.” In verse 8, we see the psalmist’s plea that God Himself, the One and Only God, judge the earth. For, only God, the real God, can and will judge creation in perfect justice. It is therefore obvious that these “gods” of Psalm 82:6 and John 10:34 are in no way the “gods” of classical Mormonism, who must become very knowledgeable, good, and righteous before they can become gods. This is clear from the official LDS instruction manual, The Gospel Through the Ages, as well as Mormon scripture, the Pearl of Great Price, which I quoted from in my previous posting, which is Part 1 of this topic.

In His use of Psalm 82:6, Jesus is making a simple argument to the people who want to kill him for blasphemy. He is proving with Psalm 82:6 that the word gods can be legitimately used to refer to others than God Himself and that its use does not mean that other beings are actually Gods, or even junior “gods” that under the direct authority of the one eternal God. In other words, Jesus is asking His attackers, If God, in Psalm 82:6 refers to people as “gods” and “children of the most High,” then why are you so upset if I, Jesus, call myself God? Jesus is using a play on words by stating that if humans can be called gods, then it is OK for Jesus, the Messiah, to call Himself God. For, of course Jesus is God the Eternal Son, the second person (not former human) of the Holy Trinity. As proof that He really is God, Jesus asks His attackers to consider the works He had done (vss. 37-38).

Now, what about Clean Cut’s assertion regarding God’s grace? Did the one eternal God of Mormonism make many gods by his grace? Is Clean Cut being clear about Mormon doctrine with his statement? Is he obfuscating or misleading, or is he correct according to Mormon scripture?

In LDS scripture, the Pearl of Great Price, Abraham 5:22 it states, “And God saw these souls [called “intelligences’ in verse 22] were good…and he said: These will I make my rulers.” In chapter four, verse one, these rulers organize the world [note that Mormonism’s “gods” do not create, but merely organize]. In verse 2, these rulers are called “Gods. If we ignore the use here of the capital G, and replace it with a small g, we can see in Mormon scripture that the original LDS God, who is the “only eternal God,” chose other “rulers” or “intelligences” to become "gods." There is no description in this passage of LDS scripture that these “gods” did anything to become gods. However, the one eternal God makes them his adjunct “gods” “for [means because] they were good.” In this way it appears on the surface that the original “only one eternal God” of Mormonism made “many…gods by his grace.” Thus, on the surface, Clean Cut appears to be in line with LDS scripture.

However, upon deeper examination, there is a serious problem with Clean Cut’s statement that the one eternal God made gods by his grace. The use of the word for in Abraham 5:22 shows us that the one eternal God of Mormonism chose beings called “intelligences” to be his “rulers” or “gods” on the basis of their inherent goodness. This is simply the standard heresy of Pelagianism and Arminianism, whereby God chooses those He sees have some inherent goodness, or worth, or ability. In other words, that God chooses based not on His own will and purposes, but because of some inherent value in other beings. Such a way destroys the sovereignty of God and puts mankind in charge of God. But this voids the voice of Scripture.

Yes, it is true that in Abraham 5 that the” intelligences” had apparently performed no overt actions to earn godhood. However, they were chosen because they were “good.” What had made these “intelligences” good? If they followed the standard Mormon "plan of salvation" they had made themselves good. They worked for it. This state of being “good” implies that they deserved to be the “rulers” under God, or his “gods.” Everywhere in Mormon doctrine, one finds the requirement that beings make themselves “good” to earn godhood. So, why would it be different with the “intelligences”? All this focus on the goodness of other beings, and God having to chose them because of their, not His, character is not grace!

At this point, the discerning Christian will recognize that Clean Cut and Mormonism have redefined grace to be something that is outside the orthodox, biblical, Christian meaning of grace. In this manner, Clean Cut is misleading and false in his use of the word grace. Just what is the Mormon definition of grace? In the official, LDS-printed book of doctrine, Gospel Principles, grace does not appear in either the Glossary or the Index! Grace, if it had any significance or importance in Mormon theology, would be listed. But it is not! In his book, The Miracle of Forgiveness and cited in Gospel Principles, former Mormon prophet and President Spencer W. Kimball, did not list grace in his index. However, he did say this about grace: “One of the most fallacious doctrines originated by Satan and propounded by man is that man is saved alone by the grace of God; that belief in Jesus Christ alone is all that is needed for salvation.” Wow! No ambiguity there, huh?

Because an LDS apostle speaks with more authority than Clean Cut, we can conclude that Clean Cut is wrong with his statement that God made many gods by his grace.

Reading Between the Clean Cut Lines, Part 1

Last week I came across a blog authored by “Clean Cut” dated September 27, 2008 (http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com) that was titled "Witnessing to Mormons." Clean Cut is apparently an active Mormon (a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) and writes apologetics, in an unofficial capacity, for the LDS church/religion. His blog’s title is a reference to "an evangelical blog that had a list of suggestions for witnessing to Mormons" that he had read and wished to comment on.

Clean Cut states: "Christians who want to witness to...Mormons - make sure you understand Mormon doctrine as Mormons understand it." Certainly, Clean Cut is correct in his admonition. In fact, it is a wise practice to ask each Mormon one encounters to explain his own understanding of Mormonism's teachings. Mormons are more diverse in their thinking than one might think. You will find a variety of answers. Clean Cut acknowledges this with his statement that "19 year old [Mormon] missionaries are not the most informed in Mormon theology." I have had two Mormon missionaries in my home tell me mutually exclusive things about key LDS doctrines in the same conversation.

Before I address Clean Cut's blog, let me introduce myself. Like Clean Cut, I completed a 2-year mission for the LDS church (Germany), attended BYU (I graduated in 1979.), have a great interest in LDS history, teachings, and practices, and I grew up in the West (Boise, Idaho area.)

However, unlike Clean Cut, I am a conservative evangelical Christian. I left Mormonism on my own accord and was not excommunicated for any cause. In early 1982, I formally resigned due to the many changes I had discovered in LDS history and doctrines while at BYU, on my mission, and after I graduated from BYU - and because I came to believe in the salvation through faith alone by grace alone of orthodox Christianity. Since then, now more than 26 years I have continued to be an observer of the LDS church's teachings and dealings. I lived for 18 years in Utah as a former Mormon, where I had almost daily interactions with Mormons, before moving back to Idaho in 2000. In addition, since the Boise, Idaho area is about 25% Mormon, I have had many conversations and dealings with Mormons here, too.

Because most Evangelicals, and perhaps many Mormons, will likely be confused or even feel purposefully mislead by Clean Cut's statements, I deemed it helpful and necessary to address his statements. Because I was an active, studious Mormon for the first 25 years of my life and then have continued to study Mormonism from a broader perspective for another 26 years, I believe I have some legitimate and accurate observations that will be of help. Now, I am not so naive to think that most Mormons will like it that I, a former Mormon, describe official LDS doctrine. Nevertheless, I will proceed with the goal of helping even just a few Evangelicals and Mormons.

In his second paragraph, Clean Cut states, "Mormon doctrine holds that there is one eternal God... and that there are many gods." As students of Mormonism know, Mormonism has held over the years that there are many gods. So, how can Clean Cut state in the year 2008 that there is both only "one eternal God" and "many gods"? The answer has to do with the LDS meaning of the word "eternal." It also lies in Clean Cut’s use of the capital letter G in reference to the "one eternal God" and his use of lower case g in reference to the "many gods." At this point, it should be clearly stated that LDS definitions of virtually all theological terms are very different from the definitions of Evangelicals and other Christians.

Because Mormon leaders, including LDS founder Joseph Smith in his 1844 "King Follet Discourse” taught that God became God by advancing from manhood unto Godhood, it would seem first that there could not have ever been any "eternal God." For if God were anything at all before He was God, then he cannot, by definition be "eternal God." For biblical Evangelicals, eternal means literally forever, with no beginning in time, and indicates an existence before the universe was created.

Mormonism's founder was not alone in plainly teaching that God the Father had been a mere man before he became God. In 1945, George F. Richards, under his authority as President of the Council of the Twelve Apostles of the Mormon church, published the book, The Gospel Through the Ages. The book’s author was Milton R. Hunter, himself a Mormon general authority in the Council of Seventy. The book was published for use by holders of the higher LDS priesthood, the Melchizedek Priesthood. That this book had this purpose and was an official LDS church publication is very clear. Richards states on page V, “Hunter was assigned the task by the general authorities.” Hunter himself, on pages VII and VIII, “expresses sincere gratitude to Elder John A. Widstoe, Elder Joseph Fielding Smith, Elder Ezra Taft Benson, and Elder Charles A. Callis for their careful perusal of the manuscript and for their kind and helpful suggestions throughout the entire time that this volume was being written and published.” Note that two of the men who carefully advised Hunter “the entire time” served as Prophet and President of the Mormon Church. This book is no accident or statement of aberrant doctrine. This official manual (This author has a Fourth Edition of March 20, 1946.) of the LDS church plainly teaches on page 104: "Mormon prophets have continuously taught...that God the Eternal Father was once a mortal man..." Note that a variety of Mormon general authorites agreed in this book that the doctrine that God was once a man was “continuously taught” by Mormon prophets.

This official LDS book, page 113, quotes LDS Prophet and Church President Lorenzo Snow's teaching" "As man now is, or God once was; As God is, so man may be." Thus, when recent LDS Prophet Hinckley indicated in a television interview that the LDS doctrine of man becoming God was not a sure teaching, he was either grossly ignorant of the LDS church’s own doctrinal manual and that “Mormon prophets continuously taught” such doctrines, or he was purposefully obfuscating.

One way Clean Cut and other Mormons can assert that there is “one eternal God and many gods” is that in Mormonism, eternal can mean not just "forever with no beginning in time before the universe was created," but simply "that which pertains to God." Therefore, when a Mormon says there is only "one eternal God," he can mean "one God who has what pertains to God," or "one God with God's attributes." Of course, this is really just a meaningless statement. It is like saying that one's car is a car because it has what makes it a car. In this case, Clean Cut is not adequately defining his terms. He is, albeit perhaps unwittingly, misleading Evangelicals. On the other hand, one can ask, is he misleading on purpose? An appropriate admonition to Clean Cut would be that he should explain LDS doctrines and his own statements, so that Orthodox Christians sufficiently understand official LDS doctrines.

Here is another way that allows Clean Cut to state, "Mormon doctrine holds that there is one eternal God... and that there are many gods." At some point, some Mormon leaders realized that some god or God could not have been a mere man prior to becoming God, because God or a god had to first create that man. In essence, they realized that the traditional, normal, biblical definition of eternal must be held to. The original God the Father could not have become God by arising out of manhood. For, who created the God who created this man who became God? At some point the nonsense of Gods making Gods making Gods, etc. has to come to a stop - there needed to have been an original, or first, God the Father. This "original God" was not a man before he became God. He became God by virtue of this own inherent characteristics and power. This idea of a superior, original God and other gods is taught in LDS scripture, the Pearl of Great Price, in Abraham 3:16-24. This author was taught such a concept of an original first God, the one with a capital G, while at BYU in the mid through late 1970's.

Perhaps this truly eternal, original God of Mormonism is similar to the God of traditional, orthodox Christianity. Perhaps, to some Mormons, this is the God Whom traditional Christians worship in ignorance. In fact, I have been told by several Mormons that both Mormons and traditional Christians really worship the same God. The problem with this kind of thinking, for the Mormon, is that Mormons are told by their leaders to worship the god who once was a man. This god who was once a man would, by definition, not be the original, truly eternal God of us Evangelicals, but only one of His underling gods. Thus, if you follow the logic, it is the Evangelicals who worship the real, never-been-man, original God, while Mormons are content to worship only a lesser god. In Mormonism, this original, truly eternal in the normal sense of the word, God then made the rules, described in Mormonism, of how men, whom He later created, become gods. In other words, the original God the Father is the only eternal God who deserves a capital G. The other gods, with a small case g, are under God in hierarchy and authority. Such reasoning allows Clean Cut and other Mormons to “have their cake and eat it, too." It allows them to appear as orthodox Christians and to be Mormons at the same time.

All this is, of course, a big mess. For Mormons will interchange "God" with a capital G, and "god" with a small g. This just confuses things even more. It would be helpful if the Mormon prophet/president would make some official pronouncement or declaration of just who their God, or god, is.

For sure, Clean Cut, and all Mormons for that matter, have a serious problem on their hands when it comes to LDS scripture and the idea of more than "one eternal God" and other "gods." For, also in the Pearl of Great Price, in the book of Moses, the idea of more that one God and god is refuted: Moses 2:1 states that God is the "Beginning and the End," which indicates in plain English that He alone is God. Chapters 1-5 of Moses state over 75 times that "I God" made the universe, not that Gods or gods (plural) did it! What has more force of meaning, the 75 statements of only one "I God" in Moses, or the only 46 statements of the various "Gods" in Abraham? 75 is 63% larger than 46. Is there only one who deserves the capital G, or are there many that deserve the capital G? Which part of the Pearl of Great Price is the correct part that the Mormon is to take seriously as the real doctrine? If Mormonism was revealed to clarify truth and bring the "fullness of the gospel" as the angel Moroni supposedly told Joseph Smith in the 1820s, why does later-written Mormon scripture confuse things? This fact alone should show the discerning person that Mormonism is not self-consistent, but is self-contradictory.

The Evangelical will recognize that any way that any Mormon, such as Clean Cut, defines the "consistently taught" Mormon concept of "one eternal God" and the "many gods," the clear teaching of the Bible is still violated. In clear passages, over and over again, such as are found in Isaiah chapters 37 through 48, we see that God is the only God (see Isaiah 37:16, 40:28; 41:4, 41:14, 42:5, 42:8, 43:11, 43:13, 44:6, 44:8, 44:24, 45:5-7, 45:14, 45:18-23, 46:5, 46:9, 48:11-12). The Pearl of Great Price cannot at the same time be true when it states that there are "Gods." And Clean Cut cannot at the same time be accurate when he says there are "many gods." The Mormon will be wise to search for the truth in this matter of God. If one has a false knowledge of God, it will result in not having eternal life! "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou has sent" (John 17:3).

In a subsequent posting, I will address Clean Cut’s statement that the "many gods" are "gods by grace" and other of his statements.