The Bible vs Joseph Smith

In this unique documentary, produced entirely in Israel, a Christian and a Mormon sit down to dialogue about one of the most important questions of faith: How do we know if a prophet is speaking the truth?

Listen in on their fascinating discussion and follow along as they travel throughout the Holy Land in search of the facts. They will put Biblical prophets and Mormon prophets to the test in order to find out if their predictions actually took place in history. If even on prediction fails to come true, then that prophet fails the test!

Via: http://sourceflix.com/the-bible-vs-joseph-smith/

Read More

A Response To A Critique of Creation Ex Nihilo - Free Will

Recently a gentlemen posted a link to a you tube video on my blog article, entitled: "Thanks to Adam and Eve for ... Sinning?" The video is regarding the presentation of the theory of Creation Ex Materia. I watched the video, which makes several claims that are lacking Biblical support as evident by the lack of any source in the Bible given, and commented attempting to correct the error. Since commenting, I have been pointed to video, after video, after video, rather than a single presentation by the author. So, as someone who desires to preach the word, to  give an answer, and to correct error, I have decided to take some of these videos, and go through them. This will serve 2 purposes:

1 - To correct the error that is taught

2 - To equip others and show them how to dialog on this topic.

So, with that said, here we go. First up is Video 1, entitled: "1 Problems with Ex Nihilo - Free Will"

Please feel free to watch the entire video, or simply follow along with what has been written below.

The first thing I notice is while the author of the video is glad to announce to viewers that he believes in "God", he does not tell his viewers "which" God. Based on the presentations, it appears it is the god of Mormonism, which is not the God of Christianity. In an effort to lay the ground work, the author points to the Westminster Confession of Faith, which is as he puts it, the "Mainstream Christian View" of who God is.

Now, interestingly, the author includes 2 slides, with minimal information. In fact, here is a image of those slides:

Now, anyone who has taken even a glance at the confession knows and will attest to this, that the document is not a small one, not at all. In fact, the document has several sections to it which include, but are not limited to:

• Of the Holy Scripture
• Of God and of The Holy Trinity
• Of God's Eternal Decree
• Of Creation
• Of Providence
• Of the Fall of man, of Sin, and of The Punishment Thereof
• Of God's Covenant with Man
• Of Christ the Mediator
• Of Effectual Calling
• Of Justification
• Of Adoption
• Of Sanctification
• Of Saving Faith
• Of Repentance unto Life
• Of Good Works
• Of the Perseverance of the Saints
• Of the Assurance of Grace and Salvation
• Of the Law of God
• Of Christian Liberty, and Liberty of Conscience
• Of Religious Worship, and The Sabbath Day
• Of Lawful Oaths and Vows
• Etc., Etc., Etc

There are 33 sections alone to this document, some with quite lengthy responses, and each, using the Bible, the written word of God as the final authority for the answers to the questions. All that to say, 2 slides that give less than 3 sentences hardly does this document justice. So rather than pointing directly to the Bible, the one and only source of doctrine for Christianity, the author goes to a very small part of a confession of faith, which is pulled from context out of section 2, which is speaking about "Of God and Of The Holy Trinity".

Interestingly, the author never quotes from the SAME document which speaks on the topic: "Of Free Will", which is his title of the video. Interesting indeed. 

At approximately the 2 minute mark, based off of what has been read for those 2 slides, the author comes to this conclusion:

God Exists

God Is Alone

God Does Not Need Anybody

God Can Do Whatever He wants

God Is Perfect

Existence Is Also Perfect Because God Is the Only Existing Entity

So, is the author correct? 

Existence: Well, according to the Bible God not only exists, but is eternally existent. So yes, the author is correct. 

God is Alone: If by "alone" the author means that the One living God exists eternally as 3 persons in a triune relationship, that is co-equal, co-eternal, and co-existent, then yes. 

God Does Not Need Anybody: This is correct. God existed before our creation. In fact, God exists outside of time, space, and matter. We see in Genesis 1:1 the creation of these 3 thing. In the beginning (time), God created (matter) the Heavens and the Earth (space). Since God exists outside of these, and is eternal, it is absolutely correct and right to say God does not "need" anybody. As God, He is complete, lacking nothing, and in perfect union. 

God Can Do Whatever He Wants: If the author means "whatever he wants" such to include things like sinning, or ceasing to be that which He is by essence, than no, God cannot do whatever He wants. God cannot lie (Numbers 23:19) for instance, so the author needs to better define his terms here. 

God is perfect: If the author is saying that God is perfect, such as to describe the immutable attributes of God, then the author is correct. 

Existence is also perfect because God is the only existing entity: If the author intends to say that the way in which God existed before the creation of all things was in perfection, then yes, that is correct. 

Then at 2 minutes 18 seconds into the video, the author has a load of questions which he fires off in rapid succession. These questions are:

1. "The Bible says, "God is love" and if God does not change, then who was God loving before creation? Itself?"
2. "What was God doing? Was God Not content? Wouldn't the decision to begin creating be a change?"
3. "How long did the, "God only" existing go on?

The author then states, "Now, I don't really have the answers to these questions, but it's just something to think about."

So what we have here, are 3 questions at least, more if each question within the question was written out, that the author not only does not know, but has no intention of trying to answer. Why ask them then? To do nothing more than to create doubt so that you will find the position he is about to begin stating as more plausible than the teachings of the scriptures. 

So before we move on with his presentation, lets look at these questions. Because if one studies the Bible, instead of throwing it out when we have a question, in favor of another gospel, we will learn that God's word is indeed reliable. 

So question one is, "The Bible says, God is love and if God does not change, then who was God loving before creation? Itself?"

What does the Bible say? When describing God, does the Bible only state that God is love? How about just this confession quoted? Well the confession cant say God is "love" alone, because by the authors very own slides and quotations, the quotes call God infinite in being and perfection, a most pure spirit, possesses all sovereign dominion over all things, all sufficient, etc. So if we are trying to be consistent to the word, and understanding the word, which I am SURE this author of the video is intending to do, we must say that God must be more than just "love". So the question is, if God is more than just love, which is an attribute, what are the other attributes of God? 

Well, we can, in a matter of speaking, kill two birds with one stone, by answering this question from the confession this author quoted, and give the scriptural foundation for each answer given. So, what attributes besides love does God possess:

• God has all life - JOHN 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself.
• Glory - ACTS 7:2 And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran.
• Goodness - PSALMS 119:68 Thou art good, and doest good; teach me thy statutes.
• Blessedness - TITUS 6:15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords. - ROMANS 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
• Most Wise - ROMANS 16:27 To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
• Most Holy - ISA 6:3 And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. REV 4:8 And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come..
• Immense - 1 KINGS 8:27 But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded? JER 23:23 Am I a God at hand, saith the Lord, and not a God afar off? 24 Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the Lord. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the Lord.
• Eternal - PSALMS 90:2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God. 1 TIMOTHY 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
• Almighty - GENESIS 17:1 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the Lord appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect. REVELATION 4:8 And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.

I could continue for pages and pages. But suffice it to say, the authors first question has been answered. God, who is eternal as we see from the verses above, existed in perfect relationship within the trinity which Biblically is supported in places such as John 1, Matthew 3, Matthew 28, etc. So the triune God is eternally existent, complete and lacking nothing within Himself, existed outside of time and space, which mean there were no billions of years all alone which is grounded in scripture, and therefor as I said before, lacked nothing. And of course, God does love God. The Father loves the Son, the Son loves the Father and obeys Him, etc. 

The second part of the question is, God does not change. The author is making a simple category mistake between the activities of God, and the attributes of God. If every time God acted, He also was guilty of change, we would not be able to believe the Bible when it says in Malachi 3:6 that God does not change. The fact that God was speaking would be an activity and would then by default, according to this author, be changing. 

God, throughout the Bible, acts in His creation. He speaks to prophets in the Old Testament, brings judgement upon sinful cities, delivers enemies into hands of others, provides rescue through His perfect sovereignty to the Israelite's during the Exodus, and even judges Pharaoh for his rebellion and sin. 

This is not God changing His attributes, it is God acting within His creation. 

Now, if God were to somehow suddenly command things like homosexuality, murder, rape, etc. the author may have had a valid point. But that is NOT what the Bible says. So this simple category error costs the author question one. It shows a lack of Biblical study for the word of God, and simply ripping any text that fits into your own man made theology does not constitute Biblical support. So question one, in both of its parts, has been answered. In fact, this answer will help answer the other "questions" that were raised. 

Question 2 states, "What was God doing? Was God Not content? Wouldn't the decision to begin creating be a change?"

We have already shown that God is eternally existent within the 3 persons of the Father, Son, and Spirit, and was lacking nothing. Now, simply because we do not know every activity that happened prior to the creation means nothing. It is not important, nor is it mans business what God did prior to creation. And those who know how to read the Bible realize that we speak where the Bible speaks, and we are silent where the Bible is silent. We do not create our own theories that contradict the rest of scripture, and shove it into that space. That's how you end up with false doctrines, gospels, and gods. 

So, God was lacking nothing, in perfect triune relationship, and the decision to create did NOT change who God was. God is creator, which if this author had read the section "Of Creation" in the Westminster Confession, he would have known. Allow me to quote: "It pleased God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, for the manifestation of the glory of His eternal power, wisdom, and goodness, in the beginning, to create, or make of nothing, the world, and all things therein whether visible or invisible, in the space of six days; and all very good." So question two has also been answered. 

Question 3 states, "How long did the, "God only" existing go on?"

The answer? The question is asking for a time limit on an eternal being, who exists OUTSIDE of time. Therefor, it renders the question useless. God, being outside of time, can not be asked, "for how long did you exist when there was no time?" 

So, it seems that the first three questions have been easily answered by simply going to God's Holy and inspired Word. By reading the Bible for what it says, and not for what I want to make it say. By trusting the Bible as the final authority, we see it is in fact trustworthy. 

Do to the length of this post, and I am not even a full 3 minutes in, I will break the posts into 3 for the response to video 1. 

In closing, I would like to end with this inspired verse from Isaiah 40:8

Read More

Silencing the Opposition

As someone whose family left Mormonism, I am used to occasionally being ridiculed, belittled, and completely ignored for leaving the church. This is certainly not the case with all those who are Mormon and who know me, the majority are quite pleasant, and we have civilized dialogue. It can lead to intense debate, but it is almost always cordial. Usually 2 or more rational adults have a conversation, and no one gets angry, even though no punches are pulled. This is the way it is supposed to be.

But for the last several months, I have noticed a change; rather than engaging in intellectual debate, my posts are now being flagged as hate speech on Facebook. And what is quite funny is the nature of the posts, it is absolutely nothing hateful or offensive. Some posts that have been removed are Bible versus with nothing else quoted, some are Mormon doctrine which has been quoted, some are saying that a certain link is not functioning, and some are simply asking for people to pray for them.

Whats more is, there appears to be no way to argue with or fight against these allegations with Facebook, and my ministry has received multiple bans, and is currently on its 3rd 30 day ban.
I have asked for those who truly feel there is anything offensive to let me know so I may comply to all standards set by the Facebook community standards. They have not. Which leads me to the reason for this blog post, where thankfully, they cannot silence me.

Due to the fact that rather even try to defend the position of Mormonism, or engage in any of the arguments I have posted, or even take my challenge of identifying what is offensive, I am convinced that the blog that I run, my ministry, and several others ministries, are to be blunt, the truth that they are trying their absolute hardest to silence. In fact, it is obvious that whomever is flagging these posts is terrified that the Mormon religion is continually being exposed to the light, that it has been weighed against the truth of the word of God, and has been found erroneous.

When you turn to the technique of attacking the messenger, you show that you cannot argue against the message. And in fact, it is absolutely a bullying technique, not to mention total and blatant dishonesty, which as far as I am aware, is a sin. If a Mormon is offended by Bible verses, or their own doctrine, than the issue is with them, and not I, so there would be no need to report a verse as "hate speech". In fact, I have asked on my page to either be willing to debate, and engage, and if not, they are officially asked by the page creator to leave, they have not followed this request.

Now I cannot say with 100% certainty who it is that is flagging these pages, but almost every major Christian outreach to Mormons have been flagged, which points strongly in the favor of someone who holds to Mormonism that is flagging the accounts, but no one is positive as whomever is doing this is acting in secret, and being inconsistent within their own world view.

All that being said, I am thankful that it is God who has provided the call, and that it is God who is in charge. God is so Holy and perfect, that He will bring glory to Himself. All we can do is continue to be used by His grace, as long as He has allowed. So I will be posting many more blog articles, looking at starting new pages and groups, and will continue to be faithful to the one who is always faithful. And you can share these posts with friends, and let them know, that people are going to great lengths to silence these posts, which I am guessing will peak their interest even more.

Read More

Refuting the "Path to Perfection"

Recently, Mormon apologist and current BYU professor Dan Peterson wrote an article entitled: Perfection Is a Very Long Path, in which he lays out his case for striving to obtain perfection, to which Petersen say, "...long distance races require ... long distances".

After reading the article, which include proof texts from the Bible to support his argument, along with a few easily answered objections, I felt it was needed to respond to this article, and correct what I find as error. So below I will answer these objections.

Dan Peterson writes, "Beginning with my mission to Switzerland, I've sometimes encountered a response to Latter-day Saint claims of additional scripture that asks, rhetorically, "We're unable to live up to what we already have in the Bible, so what good would it do us to have more?" But this seems a pretty flimsy reason for dismissing the possibility, at least, of further revelation."

The very response of, "we're unable to live up to what we already have in the Bible" is itself a bad argument, especially if this is the only argument on which someone is rejecting the addition of an entire set of extra Biblical writings, claiming to be truth. The claim makes it seem as if the Bible has already laid out an impossible mission for us to achieve, and since the Bible already makes us hopeless, why add more judgement? This of course is a false claim, and is a straw man. 

What does the Bible say? Are all men sinners? Absolutely yes, which we see in Romans 3:23, Ecclesiastes 7:20, Proverbs 20:9, 1 John 1:8, Romans 3:10, and Romans 3:11 just to name a few. 

Is this however the end of our condition? Absolutely not, which several passages make clear. Christ died to redeem His people, to purchase the elect with His blood, and to forgive the sins of all those who belong to Him. We see this in Romans 5:8, Romans 4:25, Romans 8:32, 1 John 4:10, John 3:16-17, Romans 5:10, John 17:8-9, and many many others. 

So are we unable to, in and of our own selves, live up to that which the Holy Spirit inspired to be written in the Bible? Emphatically no. We are all on the way to the judgement of God if it is through our own works or righteousness that we can escape the wrath of God. However, through the drawing of God, and regeneration, we are made alive in Christ, though we were dead in our sins, as Ephesians 2:5 states clearly. So through the righteousness of Christ, and not our own, we are reconciled to God, through which we can boast in the Lord alone, as Corinthians 1:30 states so well.

Not only this, but to use the argument that we are unable to live up to the standard the Bible has set, as a means to reject additional revelation is just flawed from the very beginning. So it is a little confusing to me why this would even be put in to this article in the way it was. But the way Petersen responds does not seem to indicate he follows the line of reasoning I just laid out, as he says this is "a pretty flimsy reason for dismissing the possibility, at least, of further revelation". To me, I am struggling to truly connect the two. 

Continuing on, Peterson writes, "After all, most of us haven't yet fully mastered even Matthew 5-7, the three chapters of Christ's Sermon on the Mount. (Perhaps, of course, you're an exception.) In fact, strictly speaking, I can't live up to Matthew 5:48 ("Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect"). But this scarcely means that all of the other verses of the Bible, to say nothing of the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, and, for that matter, the teachings of modern prophets and apostles, are superfluous."

And here we get to the famous proof text used over and over by Mormon leaders, with absolutely no additional information given, no context, no exposition, just a command. And so, it is with that I turn to one of the best short refutations written on this by two leaders in the area of counter-cult apologetics, and offer their argument. Dr. Norman Geisler, and Ron Rhodes. 

"This verse does not mean human beings can actually become perfect in this life. This is clear from the context. The context of this verse is that the Jewish leaders had taught that we should love those near and dear to us (Lev.19:18), but hate our enemies. Jesus, however, said we should love even our enemies. After all, Jesus said, God's love extends to all people (Matt. 5:45). And since God is our righteous standard, we should seek to be as he is in this regard. We are to be "perfect" (or "complete") in loving others as he is perfect. Furthermore, the Bible certainly does not give support to the idea that we can actually attain sinless perfection in this life, for all of us are fallen and sin continually (1 John 1:8). The good news is that by trusting in Jesus, his perfection becomes ours: "For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified" (Heb 10:14 NASB)." Correcting the Cults, Geisler, Rhodes

Now that we have dealt with the proof text, I should note that no one who understands the Bible would conclude by the proper context of Matthew 5:48, that since perfection is impossible, we should give up even striving for personal holiness, or grow and mature in our walk. In fact, one only need look to Romans 6:1-3 states quite clearly. But we put it in proper context, since we are born into this world as sinners, through sin being imputed to all as Romans 5:12 says, we have already failed perfection. We were born imperfect, sinful, enemies of righteousness, and lovers of the dark. Humans cannot undo what was already. We cannot change that we were born in sin and enemies of God, we can only look to God for mercy.

Next, Peterson give some overview of the word perfect, including some of the original text:

"Nevertheless, Matthew 5:48 remains an extraordinarily important verse. We are, it says, supposed to become "perfect." And this seems to suggest something more than mere (!) moral flawlessness or being error-free. The Greek word translated into English as "perfect" is "teleoi," which can mean both "initiated"— in that sense, the term was applied to those who had experienced the ancient Greek "mystery" rituals — and "mature" or "fully grown." I'll concentrate on the second meaning: A related Greek word is "telos," which refers to the natural end, goal or purpose of a thing. Thus, for example, the "telos" of an acorn is to become an oak. Grammarians speak of "perfect" verbs, which refer to actions that are done, completed, finished. It's in that sense, I think, that we should understand the King James Version's "perfect" at the end of Matthew 5. German translations of the passage commonly use "vollkommen" — which means, roughly, "fully come" — to render it; Arabic translations tend to use "kaamil," which means "complete." We're to become "perfect and entire, wanting nothing" (James 1:4)."

As we have just read from the prior rebuttal, this verse in context is not calling us to be free of error, but rather, that we should be complete in the love of our enemies. 

One area I do want to address is the analogy Petersen gives of the acorn who's "telos" is to become an oak. Now, I have no rebuttal of an acorn becoming an oak. It is natural, an acorn has all the information contained within to become an oak. The acorn does not change into something other than it has been created for. It is the natural order, an acorn will become an oak. However, the analogy fails instantly when one attempts to use that for something outsides of the same essence, or being, which is exactly what Peterson does next.

He writes:

"It seems to me that the Lord's command in Matthew 5:48 is suggesting that we should strive to grow up so as to be like our Father in heaven. That's our natural "telos." We are to God, potentially at least, as an acorn is to an oak. Which is, when you think about it, a stunningly powerful doctrine."

The above analogy which was true for the acorn, fails MISERABLY here when Petersen attempts to claim this verse means that our natural "telos" is to grow up as to be "like our Father in heaven", which by the way, translation of that, is to go through the process of exaltation in Mormonism, to attain the highest degree of glory, and become a God, like Heavenly Father is, of your own world. This is Mormon doctrine, so when a Mormon says they wish to become "like heavenly Father", clarify and ask if this is what they mean, because if they are honest, they have no choice but to say yes. Back to the analogy.

Mormonism teaches we are the literal offspring of God, so for Petersen, he fails to recognize he is not comparing anything different. But what does the Bible say? Is God the same essence, the same being as man? Is there even any other God?

Numbers 23:19 - "God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?

Isaiah 45:5 - "I am the LORD, and there is no other; Besides Me there is no God. I will gird you, though you have not known Me;"

Deuteronomy 4:35 - "To you it was shown that you might know that the LORD, He is God; there is no other besides Him."

1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God; there is no one else.

Isaiah 46:9 - "Remember the former things long past, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me,

Isaiah 45:22 - "Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth; For I am God, and there is no other.

Isaiah 45:21 - Declare and set forth your case; Indeed, let them consult together. Who has announced this from of old? Who has long since declared it? Is it not I, the LORD? And there is no other God besides Me, A righteous God and a Savior; There is none except Me.

This goes on and on and on. Not only is it clear that God is not a man, but that there is no other God besides He alone. That there is no comparison. Not only this, are we the children of God through flesh and blood, or by adoption? What does the Bible say?

Romans 8:23 - And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body.

Ephesians 1:5 - He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will,

Romans 8:15 - For you have not received a spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, "Abba! Father!"

Galatians 4:5 - so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.

And again, many other verses. So again, the analogy that Petersen uses fails, because man was not born from God, we are dust, and our "telos" is not to have our own planet and become a God, but to glorify God and worship and serve Him alone, for all eternity. 

Continuing on, Peterson writes:

"We are God's "offspring," says the apostle Paul in Acts 17:28-29. He uses the Greek word "genos," which — closely related to our words "genus" and "kin" — can be translated as "offspring," "lineage" or "race." "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit," he also says, "that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ." (See Romans 8:16-17; compare Galatians 4:7."

Peterson is correct that the word is "genos", which means:

genos: family, offspring

Original Word: γένος, ους, τό

Part of Speech: Noun, Neuter

Transliteration: genos

Phonetic Spelling: (ghen'-os)

Short Definition: offspring, family, race, kind

Definition: offspring, family, race, nation, kind.

Given the doctrinally sound teaching that we are children through adoption, this verse poses zero question in the mind of the Christian, that through our adoption, which Paul writes in Romans over and over again, that we are a part of the family of God, the bride, the body of Christ. So again, the exposition provided by Petersen is lacking theological ground. And would be heretical. 

For the remainder of the article, Peterson turns to an emotional appeal that though the path leading to perfection can be filled with trials, it takes time, and brings Nephi (a book in the book of Mormon) in to the mix. 

He states, "When we arrive at the judgment bar of God, we won't be expected to be flawless; we won't be asked to enter heaven on our own merits, as if we could somehow place our Heavenly Father in our debt. If we've accepted the redemptive sacrifice of the Savior, his unique flawlessness will be ascribed to us. "It is by grace that we are saved," testified Nephi, "after all we can do" (2 Nephi 25:23)."

What Peterson fails to understand is when we arrive to the judgement of God, unless we have been regenerated by God, and serve and worship the God of the Bible, and not the polytheistic god of Mormonism, we will spent an eternity in hell, and God is absolutely just in sending us there. One of the most down right disgusting teachings in the religion of Mormonism is that we are saved by grace, after all we can do. To anyone who thinks that this, you, like Petersen, are saying that the blood of the only begotten Son of God is not only not enough for your salvation, but yours is somehow able to add to what His lacks. 

And it is with this I end, the Bible teaches clearly in the verses given above, that man is sinful, none of us are righteous, perfection is not possible, and that we are enemies of God. It is only through God drawing us to Him, and regenerating us, that we can come to God and receive what He has given so freely. There is nothing you can do in and of yourself to earn anything, because our best works are as filthy rags to a Holy and just, and righteous God. And to live life in a lie that states you must always work to attain perfection, is placing yourself outside of what the Bible teaches, and into the hands of the enemy. 

Remember, it is through His (Christ's) righteousness we are accepted and elected, and loved by God, not because of anything we could ever do. And I pray you will look to other resources on this site, find a Bible teaching church, and read your Bible, and that the God of all truth would bring you to repentance. 

Read More

The Forgotten Trinity

Do Mormons hold to the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity? Do they affirm that within the one being that is God,  exists co-eternally, and co-equally 3 persons, namely the Father, Son, and Spirit? Or, do they deny the historical Christian stance of monotheism, and instead embrace polytheism?

The answer is sadly that yes, Mormons deny this core doctrine, and have instead replaced the One God, with three gods.

Dr. James White of aomin.org does an hour long presentation on the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity. Within the presentation, Dr. White lays out the case for the Biblical doctrine of the trinity, why it is important, and what this means.

Watch the entire video below

Read More

Matt Slick Interviews Mormons

In what may be one of the absolute best interviews with Mormons on the street, Matt Slick shows how you can dialog, debate, and with convincing boldness show the logical errors woven throughout the lie of Mormonism. Thank you to CARM and Matt Slick for their work!

This video was taken during the 2012 "Mormon Miracle Manti Pagent", which has become an excellent place to do evangelism to Mormons.

Read More

Interview on Mormonism with Jamie Pellew

Join Devin & Melissa Pellew as they discuss topics related to biblical theology, Christian apologetics and worldview issues. This week during the first hour, we will be discussing "What is the Gospel?" and the difference between justification and sanctification, which is a key distinction that most cults do not make. During the second hour, we will have a special  guest, Jamie Pellew, of "Answering Mormons Blog" in Utah, on the air with us to discuss the Mormon view of God and salvation plus other key Mormon doctrines.  You don't want to miss this show and as always feel free to call in with your questions and comments.

The interview starts with me at the 1 hour mark, going until the end of the show. Listen in as we talk about Mormon history, the translation method, the doctrine of God in mormonism, sin in mormonism, and salvation in mormonism. 

Click HERE to listen to the show. 

Thanks to Devin and Melissa for the opportunity. 

Read More

New Segment, Mormon Feedback

I would like to introduce a new segment to this website, Mormon Feedback. Are you Mormon? Have a Bishop who has given you a question to ask? Are you a Mormon Apologist or Blogger? Here is an opportunity to ask your question, have it posted, and make your case.

All I ask is to be respectful, and keep the question brief, and limit it to one topic, rather than addressing several questions. I will take several questions every Friday if they are sent in, and answer them accordingly.
If you are searching for truth, have a question about your belief in Mormonism, or want to refute something I have said, here is your opportunity. The goal? Glorifying God, defending the faith, and preaching the word.

So please e-mail me your questions to: answeringmormonsblogspot@gmail.com

In Him,

Jamie

Read More