The following topics are samples of questions and answers that have been pulled from the thousands of letters we have answered at Saints Alive over the years. Because they are unedited beyond selection, many will be written from the first person of the Saints Alive author of the answer. When the words, "The Mormons..." are used in these pages, it usually means, "The LDS Church," not any specific Mormon person or persons.

As with all segments of the Saints Alive Web Page (except the Bookstore, obviously), we place them here for your free, uncopyrighted use and downloading. We only ask that where you do use them, in the Internet or in print, you make the usual author/source/website references.

Table of Contents

#1 Differing Accounts of First Vision

The Mormons have no real substantive explanations for the multiple accounts of the First Vision. In the Summer of ‘86, the ENSIGN magazine had an article which tried to draw analogies between the alleged "conflicts" of Paul’s two accounts of his vision on the road to Damascus in Acts 9 and 22—saying that Smith’s discrepancies amount to the same thing. Acts 9:7 says "the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man." Acts 22:9 says they "saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me." They try to say that this is just as bad as the Smith problems.

Remember that only the Bible can interpret the Bible (2 Peter 1:20) What is meant here can be easily determined by cross-referencing it to other, similar passages . This is identical to what happens in John 12:28-29 where the Father speaks from heaven, but although those listening heard something which sounded like thunder, evidently only the apostles understood the actual words spoken. (See also John 10:14-15, 26-27 in which Jesus teaches that only those who believe can truly hear his voice) Thus, what is meant is that the other men didn’t understand the speech of the voice which spoke. For example, you could hear the voice of someone talking next to you in Chinese, but you probably would not understand it.

Similarly, the people with Paul in Damascus heard the sound of the voice, but understood not what was said.

On the other hand, with Joseph Smith, you are talking about multiple accounts with a) 1 being, b) angels, c) an angel, d) 2 beings—plus different words in the script, both from Smith and from the "heavenly visitor." Entirely different matter! But it‘s the best the Mormons can do to try and explain away what is a very damaging situation.

#3- Was there really a Great Apostasy?

The LDS Church teaches that soon after the death of the last apostle (other than John, whom they believe to still be alive) the true Church began to die off for lack of apostolic (priesthood) authority. Thus, sometime in the second century, the primitive apostolic church essentially vanished, and was gradually replaced with priestcraft and apostasy—culminating in the formulation of the Catholic church. The definitive LDS work on this is the book by James Talmage, THE GREAT APOSTASY, Deseret Books, 1968.

According to the Mormons, it was this general apostasy which necessitated the "Restoration" under Joseph Smith in 1830. Otherwise, Smith would be irrelevant—if it isn’t broken, it doesn't need to be fixed. Thus, it is absolutely essential to the Mormon position that this apostasy occur. This apostasy is why it is impossible for both the LDS Church to be true and the rest of Christianity to be true. One cancels the other out.

As essential as this argument is to Mormonism, it does not bear close scrutiny—either historical or scriptural. It contradicts the Bible; for Jesus said that He "would be with you alway, even unto the end of the world." (Mt.28:19) and also that "upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."(Mt.16:18) The divinely inspired Paul also wrote, "Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end, Amen."(Eph.3:21)

Now if Jesus promised He would be with us always; and that the gates of hell could never prevail against His church; how could there have been such a universal apostasy as Joseph Smith taught? How could Jesus be glorified by His church "throughout all ages" if from 300-1830 AD it was drowning in apostasy? Certainly, there have been times when the church was not all it should be; but Jesus was still with it totally, and prevented hell from crushing it. I’d believe Jesus’ Word over Joseph’s.

#4— Book of Mormon Archaeology and Diane Wirth’s book

We are not well-acquainted with the book you mention, A CHALLENGE TO THE CRITICS by Diane Wirth, but it almost certainly could not have anything in it very startling. The official position of BYU archaeologists is and has been for years that there is not any real evidence of Book of Mormon civilizations in Pre-Colombian America. In fact, many LDS scholars like Ray T. Matheny and Leonard Arrington have actually gone on record as saying that it doesn’t even matter if the Book of Mormon is true or not, or if archaeology backs it up; because it’s "true, even if it isn’t literally true."

Now, if they can be comfortable statements like that, we really feel sorry for them. We constantly hear reports of some finding which "proves" the Book of Mormon, but upon investigation, they do not stand up under investigation, or else are just "faith-promoting stories."

One fellow called up when Ed and Bill were on the BOB LARSON TALK-BACK SHOW and said that he was on the archaeology faculty of a certain university in the Midwest and had just become a Mormon because he had found, on a dig down in Peru, proof which absolutely vindicated the Book of Mormon.

The funny thing is, we called up the university after the show was over and found out that 1) they HAD no archaeology department; 2) they never had any digs anywhere, much less Peru; and 3) they had no professors who recently became Mormons. You have to wonder how the Mormon who made that call justifies that kind of deception?

In a widely read article in the journal DIALOGUE, Michael Coe, a highly respected authority on New World archaeology, wrote in the Summer 1973 issue, pp.41-42, 46:

Mormon archaeologists over the years have almost unanimously accepted the Book of Mormon as an accurate, historical account of the New World peoples...Let me now state categorically that as far as I know, there is not one professionally trained archaeologist, who is not a Mormon, who sees any scientific justification for believing the foregoing to be true, and I would like to state that there are quite a few Mormon archaeologists who would join this group...The bare facts of the matter are that nothing, absolutely nothing, has even shown up in any New World excavation which would suggest to a dispassionate observer that the Book of Mormon, as claimed by Joseph Smith is an historical document relating to the history of early migrants to our hemisphere.

#5— Who in Mormonism is authoritative?

Many Mormons will make the common mistake of saying that the sources we quote are not authoritative, and are not used as teaching guides. The latter may or may not be true; but be-fore we go much further, the LDS person needs to understand something.

The LDS church tends to deceive its people, and the general populace, by not laying all its cards on the table. Usually new converts are not im-mediately told the more odd doctrines of the church. They are never mentioned to investigators of the church.

The fact is, that both Joseph Smith and Brigham Young regarded the sermons they preached as being utterly gospel truth! In fact, Brigham Young stated the following:

I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve. The people have the oracles of God continually.1

The Lord almighty leads this Church, and he will never suffer you to be led astray if you are found doing your duty. You may go home and sleep as sweetly as a babe in its mother’s arms as to any danger of your leaders leading you astray.2

Joseph Fielding Smith, another LDS "prophet," proclaimed:

What is Scripture? When one of the brethren stands before a congregation of the people today and the inspiration of the Lord is upon him, he speaks that which the Lord would have him speak. It is just as much scripture as anything you will find in any of these records and yet we call these the standard works of the Church. We depend, of course, upon the guidance of the brethren, who are enti-tled to inspiration.3

...therefore it behooves us, as Latter-day Saints, to put our trust in the presiding authorities of the Church...no man ever went astray by following the counsel of the authorities of the Church.4

Let's be clear on the point that if Ezra Taft Benson, Brigham Young or Joseph Smith or any other apostle like Bruce R. McConkie or Orson Pratt write something or preach something, it will be doctrinally correct and as authoritative for a Mormon as the Bible or the Book of Mormon, according to LDS theology.

Some of these things may not be taught in Sunday school classes often, but they were taught and are taught as staunch LDS doctrine. It’s just that they are doctrines the church is timid about letting anybody find out about. But they’re still there!

1 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES, vol.13, p.95 (1870). 2 ibid., vol.9, p.289. 3 Joseph Fielding Smith, DOCTRINES OF SALVATION, vol.1, p.186 (1954). 4 ibid., p.243.

#6— On Baptismal Regeneration

Do we need to be baptized in water to be saved, especially in the light of Acts 2:38? As far as the word, "remission" in Acts 2:38, all the reliable commentators agree that the key is the word eis "for." Both MATTHEW HENRY’S COMMENTARY and THE JAMIESON, FAUSSET AND BROWN COMMENTARY agree that the passage would be rendered in the Greek: "in reference to the remission of sins." J,F,B says that "this is the visible seal of that remission."1

Thus, it does not mean that the baptism is "for" the remission of sins in sense that it causes it. The sins are already gone, washed in the blood of the Lamb. This same word, eis, is also translated "upon," "with reference to," "because of," and "into." Peter here was simply saying that the new believer should be baptized UPON having their sins remitted through faith in Christ.

We have this same usage in the English. A man is arrested "for" stealing. That doesn’t mean he was arrested in order to steal, but rather that he was arrested as a consequence of his stealing. We are baptized as a consequence of our having our sins remitted.

1. Acts 8:39—you ask if the cleansing of the eunuch’s heart could have taken place first, before his baptism; and this is perfectly acceptable—especially in the light of the dozens of scripture that teach salvation by faith and faith alone.

2. Acts 22:16—Yes, calling upon the name of the Lord is how their sins were washed away, not baptism. As you say, Eph.5:26 supports this, as also does Rom.10:13—"Whosoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.".

3. As far as the 8 people being saved by water, the Greek word there is di, which is better translated "through."2 This is the same Greek word and the same linguistic problem as women being saved in child-bearing in 1 Tim. 2.3 This doesn’t mean the women is saved BY bearing children but rather that she is preserved from harm during the ordeal of child-birth. Similarly, the sailors on the ark were not saved by water, but FROM water. Did water save Noah, or did the ark?

Important to note: they were saved because Noah BELIEVED! It was Noah’s faith in the promises of God that made the ark possible which preserved them from death. You are right, of course, that both the thief on the cross and the account of Cornelius in Acts 10, both of whom were obviously saved without being baptized.

4. Re: 1 Pet.3:20-22. He describes baptism as the answer of a "good conscience" toward God. The problem is, Heb.9:14 tells us that the only way a conscience can be purged of dead works is by the blood of Jesus. Similarly, Jesus asserts in Mt.19:17 that NO ONE is good but God. These two verses make clear that the "good conscience" spoken of in 1 Peter is, in fact, one which has already been cleansed and sanctified by the blood of Jesus and had His righteousness imputed to it. Bottom line: the person is already saved!

All this is a bit confusing, but much of it comes from people trying to complicate the simple message of the gospel. Men always seem to want to try and add to what Jesus has done for us. The "great cloud" of scriptural witnesses is for salvation by grace alone, without any help from us (Eph.2:8-9, Acts 16:31, Rom.10:9, 13, Jn.3:16,1 Jn.5:13, Gal.5:4, Gal.3:2-3).

1 THE BETHANY PARALLEL COMMENTARY ON THE NEW TESTAMENT, Bethany House, 1983, p.710. 2 George Ricker Berry, INTERLINEAR GREEK-ENGLISH NEW TESTAMENT, Baker Books, 1984, p.599. 3 Berry, p.542.

#7 Is The Book of Mormon Another Testament of Christ?

The LDS Church advertises the Book of Mormon as "Another Testament of Jesus Christ." This claim is even stamped in print on the cover of the book’s recent editions. But is it really true? Let’s just test it by one simple test. What happened when Jesus went to Calvary in the Bible and in the Book of Mormon. The "Testament" should be the same!

Matthew 27:50-54: Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.

Mark 15:37 And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost. And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom. And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God.

Luke 23:44-47: And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour. And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst. And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost. Now when the centurion saw what was done, he glorified God, saying, Certainly this was a righteous man.

John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

The word, earthquake, is used here to state that the earth shook. It must not have been severe. John doesn’t even mention it. Luke indicates that people stood by as the earth shook and the sun went into eclipse for three hours. There is one clear thing. No one died. At His resurrection on the third day, graves were opened and some Saints were resurrected to walk into the city.

MATTHEW 28:1-6 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.

Again, earthquake is not used in the destructive sense. The earth shook and the stone rolled away from the door. People were not killed.

Not quite the same story in the Book of Mormon:

In the Book Of Mormon, Jesus brought death and destruction with him to the Cross. In 3 Nephi, Chapters 8 and 9, it details the events testifying of Christ’s crucifixion.

It describes the desolation of the great city of Zarahemla by fire, and the city of Moroni "...did sink into the sea and the inhabitants thereof were drowned... the earth was carried up upon the city of Mornihah...there was great and terrible destruction in the land southward......terrible destruction in the land northward....the highways were broken up....many great and noble cities were sunk and many burned and many shaken till the buildings thereof had fallen to the earth.....all these great and terrible things were done in the space of three hours."

3 Nephi Chapter 9 tells of further wrath as the cities and inhabitants of Gigal, Onihah, Mocum, Jerusalem, Gadiandi, Gadiomnah, Jacob, Gimgimmo, Jacobugath, Laman, Josh, Gad, and Kishkumen are anihilated. (a total of 16 major cities)

Who did all this killing to testify of our Lord’s atonement on Calvary? 3 Nephi 9:15 reveals the murderer of approximately 2 million innocent inhabitants of the Book of Mormon lands, "Behold, I am Jesus Christ the son of God. I created the heavens and the earth and all things that in them are." He adds, (in verse 21), "behold, I have come unto the world to bring redemption unto the world to save the world from sin."

I guess the easiest way for the Book of Mormon Jesus to "bring redemption" was to kill almost every human being; at least the vast majority of that portion of his "other sheep have I." This Jesus was a god of wrath, exercising some form of Old Testament Judgment by the one who was supposed to be the end of the law

The Biblical Jesus cried out to His Father on behalf of those who nailed him to a cross with cruel spikes, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing." The Book of Mormon Jesus wipes out millions of people who knew nothing of Calvary. Pretty simply, we see two different Jesus’ here.

"THE VAPOR OF DARKNESS"

Another comparison the Bible offers us is the astronomical occurrences at the death of Jesus. As noted above, Luke's gospel says that there was a darkness over all the earth (vs.44-45). Mt.27:45 says "Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour." and Mk.15:33 concurs almost exactly. Now the word used in the Greek for "earth" almost always means the earth as a whole, or the entire inhabited earth. (VINE’S EXPOSITORY DICTIONARY, p.352-53). Therefore we can assume that the 3 evangelists meant that the darkness covered the entire earth. This would include the Book of Mormon lands.

However, again we have a substantial difference between the two accounts. It seems clear from the Bible that there is nothing unusual about the darkness. Jesus’ disciples and the Romans about the cross got about without difficulty and saw the Lord die. John, an eye-witness, even makes a special point of saying that he saw Jesus pierced. (Jn.19:34-35)

The Book of Mormon darkness seems to have started at the time the Biblical darkness ended (3 Nephi 8:19). "And it came to pass that there was thick darkness upon all the face of the land, insomuch that the inhabitants thereof...could feel the vapor of darkness; And there could be no light, because of the darkness, neither candles, neither torches; neither could there be fire kindled...so that there could not be any light at all; And there was not any light seen.. neither the sun nor the moon nor the stars, for so great were the mists of darkness upon the face of the land. And it came to pass that it did last for the space of three days that there was no light seen."Ñ3 Nephi 8:20-23.

Now that’s quite a different type of darkness. It seems to be a tangible thing which allowed no light at all. Not only that, but it lasted for 3 days instead of 3 hours. This is utterly different from the Bible. When the Bible says gloom covered the entire earth during the crucifixion, the Book of Mormon teaches that a mysterious "vapor of darkness" started right after the crucifixion and lasted for 3 days.

How can both be true, especially when you consider how this darkness would violate the laws of physics? No "darkness" can stop light, because it is the absence of light. Since the LDS "God" cannot bypass natural law, he could not make such a darkness.

This is some way for the Book of Mormon Jesus to celebrate the first Easter, by wiping out a couple million people and then smothering the survivors in impossible darkness! The question must be asked again, why would Jesus inflict so horrifying a punishment upon his "other sheep" when the folks who nailed Him to the cross only got a tremor and a gloomy afternoon?

HAVE A HAPPY EASTER!

The LDS Jesus then does another rather un-Biblical thing. After descending to earth, he orders the surviving Nephites to "thrust your hands into my side...[and] feel the prints of the nails in my hands and my feet..."-3 Nephi 11:14.

Then, what most LDS experts estimate to be about a half-million people troop forward and stick their hands in his wounds! Figuring 30 seconds per person, it would have taken almost 3 days for the LDS Jesus to stand there and let people poke at him.

Now remember, these are the Nephite "true believers;" the ones who were counted worthy enough to escape having their cities fall on them. These are the cream of the crop!

Does the Biblical Jesus ever do anything like this? Well, of course there is Thomas. But Thomas is not presented as any kind of paragon! Jesus told him, "Because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they who have not seen, and yet have believed. "John 20:29. The Biblical Jesus valued faith, and gave a special blessing to those who did not need such demonstrations. Thomas never did actually touch Him!

Earlier, in John 20:17, Jesus discouraged Mary Magdalene from touching Him at all. Yet we are asked to believe that this same Jesus allowed a "multitude" to spend days doing it. It seems like another odd way to celebrate the first Easter! Can this be the same Jesus of the Bible?

ANOTHER JESUS? The Christ of Mormonism is not the same Christ of the Bible. 2 Cor.11:3-5 tells us that there will be those who would teach a different Christ. Paul says of them, "For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ". So there is a Biblical warning about those who would bring the doctrine of another Jesus and a simple test. Do the Mormons and the Book of Mormon pass that test? No.

The Mormons have a difficult time understanding what actually happened at Calvary. In their pamphlet, WHAT THE MORMONS THINK OF CHRIST, we see the problem. In the section, The Blood of Christ (page 22 in the 1976 edition), we read:

"Christians speak often of the blood of Christ and its cleansing power. Much that is believed and taught on this subject, however, is such utter nonsense and so palpably false that to believe it is to lose one’s salvation. For instance, many believe or pretend to believe that if we confess Christ with our lips and avow that we accept him as our personal savior, we are thereby saved. They say that his blood, without any other act than mere belief, makes us clean.

"What is the true doctrine of the blood of Christ? Salvation comes because of the atonement, and the atonement was wrought through the shedding of the blood of Christ. In Gethsemane Christ sweat great drops of blood from every pore when he conditionally took upon himself the sins of the world, and then the shedding of his blood was completed upon the cross."

This is not the Biblical account of the Atonement! Jesus went to Gethsemane to pray and prepare. The Atonement was the Cross! The garden was the sanctification of the sin offering (Leviticus 4:3-5) to be given ONCE - for all - at the cross.

The LDS Church teaches in its Articles of Faith, Article 3, "We believe that through the atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel (The laws and ordinance of the MORMON gospel) ."

These Mormon laws and ordinances have been placed there, in the way of the Cross, blocking the LDS people from it and its cleansing power!

The Bible clearly teaches another Christ; and another gospel...

In Col. 2:13-15 Paul writes: "And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it."

And in Ephesians 2:13ff: "But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh."

The Mormon Jesus has been stripped of his unique Deity and his sacrifice on the cross has been robbed of its power. Theirs is a tragically bloodless Christ, whose death only brought us immortality, NOT eternal life. Their Jesus forces us under laws, ordinances and an all-too-human priesthood. This is not the "Good News" of the Bible:

HEBREWS 9:11ff "But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:

How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance...Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;

For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. "

HEBREWS 10:28ff "He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?"

In the early LDS church, there was a more orthodox Christ preached. But, when Joseph began to teach the strange doctrines of this different Christ, one without the redemptive powers, the church could no longer deal with the reality of the blood of Calvary and its full redemptive work, That was when the church removed the red wine from the communion table and went to water. This act literally washed away the reality of the blood from its basically Christen converts. The same holds true today. The cross and the blood have become strangers to the saints.

#8— Is the Bible true according to Mormonism?

Contrary to Mormon thought, the Bible cannot be changed or tampered with (Mt.5:18, 1 Pet.1:25, Is.40:8, 51:6, Ps.119:89; 12:6-7; 19:7-8; 111:7; Lk.16:17)

Is the Bible denied by LDS teaching? Yes it is, by THEIR official Articles of Faith: "#8, We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God."

That is pretty plain. The Mormons don’t trust God to perfectly preserve His Word as He promised (Matt.5:18, Luke 16:17, 1 Peter 1:24-25). Apostle McConkie, the leading theologian in the Church for a generation, wrote:

"Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors—many plain and precious things were deleted, in consequence of which ERROR AND FALSEHOOD POURED INTO THE VARIOUS CHURCHES. One of the great heresies of modern Christendom is the unfounded as-sumption that the Bible contains all of the inspiring teachings now extant among men!"—MORMON DOCTRINE, pp.82-83.

That is even plainer! The Bible is not to be trusted! Consider this, if the Bible were to-tally trustworthy, why did Joseph Smith in his "Inspired Version" (Now featured in ev-ery LDS edition of the Bible) feel it necessary to rewrite thousands of words in it.

You see trusting the Bible is like trusting in Jesus, because Jesus IS THE WORD. It is all or nothing! You can’t just trust parts of the Bible and say you believe in the Bible. If parts of the Bible are wrong, then how do you know which parts? How can you judge, without something sure and certain to judge with?

God would not do that to His people. He loves us too much to give us His Word and then let it be corrupted. What real human father would write his son an important letter and then allow the letter to be changed in important ways? God, Who is much better and much more powerful than any earthly father, would not let His Bible be changed if He personally promised that it would not be changed. Or is God a liar?

#9— Towards a Witnessing Bibliography

"OFFICIAL" MORMON SOURCES

MORMON DOCTRINE by Bruce R.McConkie, Bookcraft, Salt Lake City, 1966. A MARVELOUS WORK AND A WONDER by LeGrand Richards, Deseret Books, Salt Lake City, 1950. THE BOOK OF MORMON, Joseph Smith, Jr., The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City. DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS, Joseph Smith, Jr., The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City. THE PEARL OF GREAT PRICE, Joseph Smith, Jr., The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City. THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH (6 vol) by Joseph Smith, Jr., et.al. Deseret Books, Salt Lake City TEACHINGS OF THE PROPHET JOSEPH SMITH, ed. by Joseph Fielding Smith, Deseret Books, Salt Lake City, 1976. THE GREAT APOSTASY by James E. Talmage, Deseret Books, Salt Lake City, 1968. THE JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES, (26 vol.) Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, et. al.

BOOKS BY CHRISTIANS ABOUT MORMONISM:

THE GOD MAKERS by Ed Decker (former Mormon) and Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene, OR. THE GODMAKERS II, Ed Decker and Caryl Matrisciana, Harvest House, Eugene, OR. DECKER'S COMPLETE HANDBOOK ON MORMONISM, Ed Decker Harvest House, Eugene, OR WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT MORMONS, by Ed Decker, Harvest House, Eugene, OR. BEYOND MORMONISM by Jim Spencer (former Mormon) Chosen Books, Fleming Revell, Old Tappan, NJ. THE MAZE OF MORMONISM by Dr. Walter Martin, Bethany House, Minneapolis MORMONISM, MAMMA AND ME by Granny Geer (former Mormon), Moody Press, Chicago, IL. HOW TO ANSWER A MORMON by Robert A. Morey, Bethany House, Minneapolis. HAVE YOU WITNESSED TO A MORMON LATELY? by Jim Spencer, Chosen Books, Fleming Revell, Old Tappan, NJ. MORMONISM’S TEMPLE OF DOOM by Bill Schnoebelen and Jim Spencer (former Mormons) Triple J Publications, Boise, ID. WHAT’S GOING ON IN THERE? by Chuck Sackett (former Mormon), Sword of the Shepherd Ministries, Thousand Oaks, CA.

#10—Mormons & the Blacks

Blacks weren’t allowed to hold the priesthood until 1978 because it is Mormon doctrine that black people have been born that way because they were "less valiant" in the pre-existence, and did not side with Jesus in the battle against Lucifer.

Mormons believe we all existed prior to birth in spirit world with the Father, and that 1/3rd of the spirits rebelled with Lucifer and became demons; 1/3rd of them fought valiantly with Jesus and are rewarded by being born into nice, white Mormon families. The final third are punished for their lack of zeal by being born with black skin. They believe that black skin is the mark of the curse of Cain, and therefore it was always taught that blacks were accursed and would never hold the priesthood or be allowed in the temple.

The curse was lifted in 1978 (even though Mormon prophets had taught it wouldn’t be lifted until every white person had the Mormon priesthood). It seems to have been lifted primarily because of political and social pressure; and the fact the LDS Church was in danger of losing its IRS status for being a racist church. Of course, the Mormons say it is a revelation—even though it contradicts earlier "revelations."

THE "REVELATION"— TEN YEARS LATER

From every LDS quarter, official or non-official, the tenth anniversary of the "Revelation" which opened the priest hood to black people, has been heralded with almost unparalleled gusto! Al though we applaud any move by the Mormons to ward Christianity; we also realize that the change has declared "open season" on blacks.

With magazines and news papers like the "Beehive Sentinel" doing pieces on the "wonderful ‘Darkies’" (LDS Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith’s words in 1963), we just felt that a closer look at the Church’s relations with black people was needed.

The LDS church is trying to rewrite history. Orwell wrote in the classic, 1984 that those who control the present control the past. That epigram could well be the motto for LDS leaders. 140 years of blatant racism has suddenly been for got ten.

To be fair, it must be noted that when the Church began, the view that black people were descended from Cain and therefore cursed to be slaves was extant. It is evident that the thoughts of Joseph Smith were shaped by his culture. How ever, we must remember that Smith, Brigham Young, etc. claimed special revelation. They claimed to be more than just clergy men. They were prophets of God!

Paul rose above his culture and dealt with racism in a way which was profoundly radical: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."—Gal. 3:28.

God is not bound by culture, nor by prejudice. If it was true in the New Testament times that race made no difference; then why wasn’t it true in the days of Joseph and Brigham? Certainly there were Christians who had racist ideas; but we must not forget that great men of God like William Wilberforce were at the forefront for the abolition of slavery, while the LDS prophets were mumbling in their beards about Ham and Egyptus. Their minds were still fogged by 19th century prejudice in the 1960’s and ‘70’s.

We need to hear what they were mumbling then, just to keep things in perspective amidst all the hype this summer. Brigham Young observed, "You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild and seemingly without the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind."—Journal of Discourses, v.7, p.290.

He also noted, with magisterial finality: "Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who be longs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain [the black race], the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so."—ibid., v.10, p.110.

Young’s successor, John Taylor declared that, "after the flood we are told that the curse that had been pronounced upon Cain was continued through Ham’s wife, as he had married a wife of that seed. And why did it pass through the flood? Because it was necessary that the devil should have representation on the earth..."—ibid., v.22, p. 30.

Late LDS apostle Bruce R. McConkie in his MORMON DOCTRINE has written: "Racial degeneration, resulting in differences in appearance and spiritual aptitude, has arisen since the Fall. We know the circumstances under which the posterity of Cain (and later of Ham) were cursed with what we call Negroid racial characteristics." p.616.

As if to cap off this dreary little litany of intolerance, we have this official letter from the First Presidency of the Church from July 17, 1947: "From the days of the Prophet Joseph even until now, it has been the doctrine of the Church, never questioned by the church leaders, that the Negroes are not entitled to the full blessings of the gospel."—quoted in MORMONISM AND THE NEGRO, pp. 46-47 by Stewart and Berrett.

That this doctrine remained "on the books" of a supposedly Christian church until 1978 is inexcusable. Since 1978, the LDS "memory holes" have been running at full steam, sucking away all those nasty teachings and even changing wording of the "inspired" Book of Mormon from "white and delightsome" to "pure and de light some" so as not to offend any black converts.

Seeing the articles in the LDS publications, it is apparent that all is still not well in "Zion" when it comes to racism. In their attempt to show the Church’s new "multi-racial" image the requisite number of black ball-players and musicians who have be come LDS are being trotted out. It is as if the Church has moved to the "Gee those folks sure can play ball and dance good" attitude! In the 6/4/88 issue of the "Sentinel", for ex ample, are listed some "well-known black LDS."(p.13).

A large majority of those listed are either athletes, entertainers, or BYU staffers. This is not to say that they aren’t fine people; but only to show that the Church has not re ally moved that far along! Tokenism is rampant. In 10 years there are still no black general authorities.

Also, it may indicate that most of US blacks are simply too smart to join a church which has discriminated against them for 140 years long after the rest of us repented! It is important to note the vague figures cited. The "Sentinel" reports that there are c.75,000-100,000 blacks in the Church. Of these, 30,000 are in West Africa and 28,000 in other Third World countries. That only leaves 17,000-42,000 blacks in the US; where the Church’s racism is well-known.

The "testimonies" in these articles carefully skirt the issue of past doctrine and deal with the usual warm "feelings" about the Book of Mormon. We truly grieve over the precious black people world-wide who are being drawn into this deception. Sadly, as far as Mormonism is concerned, Satan is now an "equal opportunity employer."

#11— Blacks and the Pre-existence

Brigham Young said that blacks are "uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild and seemingly without the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind." (JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES, 7:290).

About Blacks and the war in heaven, (Prophet) Joseph Fielding Smith wrote in DOCTRINES OF SALVATION, vol.1, p.66-67 (which most LDS have in their libraries): There is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were obedient, more or less, to the laws that were given us there. Those who were faithful in all things there received greater blessings here, and those who were not faithful received less...There were no neutrals in the war in heaven. All took sides either with Christ or with Satan. Every man had his agency there, and men receive rewards here based upon their actions there, just as they will receive rewards hereafter for deeds done in the body. The Negro, evidently, is receiving the reward he merits.

That seems pretty clear. Mormons believe the blacks are being punished for something they did in the pre-existence. Now, if they weren’t neutral; then the only answer left is that they opposed Christ and His angels along with Satan—otherwise, why would they be cursed? They certainly wouldn’t be cursed for fighting FOR Christ. This is just common sense. This teaching is racist doctrine to the core, even though it was changed slightly in 1978 by Spencer W. Kimball! See also our tract, "The Mormon Church and the Black."

#12— On 1 John 5:13 and "Blessed Assurance!"

Every Christian knows ( should know) that when they die, they will instantly be with God the Father in heaven, without a tiny doubt. Why? Because the Bible tells us so: "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God that ye may KNOW that you have eternal life."—1 Jn.5:13.

Now, consult the late LDS apostle and theologian, Bruce R. McConkie. He carefully defines "eternal life" in his MORMON DOCTRINE. (p. 670 ["Salvation"]):

Salvation in its true and full sense is synonymous with exaltation or eternal life and consists in gaining an inheritance in the highest of the three heavens within the celestial kingdom. With few exceptions, this is the salvation of which the scriptures speak. It is the salvation which the saints seek...This full salvation is obtained in and through the continuation of the family unit in eternity, and those who obtain it are gods.

That’s as plain as day "Eternal life = godhood and exaltation" and I KNOW I’ve got it because the Bible says so! That is being Born Again—when you know for certain where you are going when you die—NOT being dunked into a baptismal font. When you KNOW you are going to Glory because you are trusting in Jesus’ righteousness and His shed blood on the Cross and nothing that you have done. (Ephesians 2:8-9)

That is one of the cardinal differences between Mormonism and Christianity. I have yet to meet a Mormon who knows where they are going when they die. They lack the blessed assurance of 1 John 5:13! Thus, they cannot be saved, and are not real Christians, no matter how hard they try, or how much they do.

#13— Blood Atonement

Due to the sheer quantity of information on the blood atonement doctrine and polygamy, I won’t even attempt to go over all that’s available. What I will do is present a basis for the doctrines from LDS scripture and refer you to some sources for additional material. Although seemingly unrelated, the two doctrines are dealt with together for two reasons: 1) they have a common spiritual basis in D&C 132, and 2) they show that Mormonism is clearly anti-Christian. Plural marriage and blood atonement are doctrines that Mormons would replace historic Christian orthodoxy with!

Referring to D&C 132: vs.37-38 stress the right for Abraham to have concubines and explains how David erred in polygamy. V.40 gives Joseph Smith the appointment to restore all things. Although most Mormons don’t know or won’t accept it, Joseph did his best to restore concubinage and polygamy. V.52 admonishes Emma to receive all those who have been given to Joseph. Obviously, the topic of plural marriage was not a new item in the Smith family. Vs.61 & 62 give Mormon men the right to join in the "Principle." V64 says that if a wife does not believe in the doctrine, she shall be destroyed.

(Interestingly, Emma Smith was threatened with that very destruction—yet history shows that although she resisted the doctrine of plural marriage, she lived to a ripe old age. Her "prophet" husband who threatened her with destruction was dead within the year—shot by a mob after being imprisoned in Carthage jail for causing a riot in Nauvoo in which a printing press accusing Joseph of having more than one wife was destroyed. Historical irony, or the judgment of God?)

Blood atonement is presented in vs.26, 41. 26 says that if a man commits murder after being sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise, he shall be destroyed in the flesh. V.41 is a stern warning to women who commit adultery. Apparently what is good for the gander is not good for the goose! The rest of D&C 132 pertains to becoming a god in three "easy" lessons; but that’s an altogether different issue.

A small paperback written by Joseph Fielding Smith entitled BLOOD ATONEMENT AND THE ORIGIN OF PLURAL MARRIAGE deals with the topic from a Mormon point of view. He says the founders of Utah incorporated blood atonement into their laws so violators could atone for their own sins. (See also DOCTRINES OF SALVATION, v.1, p.136)

Historically, the LDS church practiced polygamy and blood atonement before the D&C 132 revelation was given. As early as 1835, a 17 year old girl named Fanny Alger was found pregnant with Joseph’s baby. Another early conquest was Malissa Willis, and of course Emily Partridge was on the scene just prior to the revelation. See EMMA by Keith and Ann Terry, pp.70, 73, and 138. They claim Joseph was with at least 40 women. Blood atonement was also practiced in the early days at Nauvoo also, see THE CONFESSIONS OF JOHN D. LEE.

It may be of interest to understand how Joseph and the boys could lie so easily when confronted with the truth about their plural wives. By viewing the church as a corporation and the priesthood as an office of God, they could feel that they were involved in two different organizations at the same time. When people asked, "Does the church practice polygamy?" they answered no. If anyone asked "Does the ‘holy Melchizedek priesthood’ hold the keys of plural marriage, and do you participate in that function?" they should have answered yes.

The doctrine of blood atonement also had some special coded meaning in it. To Mormons, murder was not killing. Killing was done to non-Mormons by Mormons. Murder was done to Mormons by non-Mormons. Killing was done out of love to prevent people from going to hell. As Mark Twain said, "Many a stranger has found himself down an alley happily awaiting a hearse, after making a few comments on polygamy." (See ROUGHING IT by Twain)

The theological basis (such as it is) for blood atonement can be found in DOCTRINES OF SALVATION by Joseph Fielding Smith, vol. II, p.94 and vol. I p.134. Joseph Smith taught that certain sins were so grievous that the blood of Christ was insufficient to cleanse them (contrary to 1 John 1:7). Murder, adultery, and covenant breaking should be personally atoned for in modern belief. Today Mormons defend and reject polygamy, saying they "don’t practice it." Yet they still believe it and it is still in their scriptures in D&C 132. They cling tenaciously to the doctrine of plural marriage and deny the atoning power of the blood of Jesus.

Do Mormons practice polygamy today? Many LDS husbands, if their wife dies first, is married to a second wife in the temple and believe that they will have both wives in heaven. Plus, in my experience, many Mormons (especially those of "old families") do still practice it on the sly. There are the "Fundamentalist Mormons," many of whom are officially kicked out of the LDS church just for being polygamists and practicing what Joseph and Brigham commanded. Blood atonement for official Mormondom is now in the hands of the state; Utah being the only state where a man can be executed by firing squad (to shed his blood). Unofficially, we wouldn’t put anything past them.

For a presentation of their present day attitudes on polygamy, see ROCKY MOUNTAIN SAINTS by Taylor. The book, ORRIN PORTER ROCKWELL, MAN OF GOD, SON OF THUNDER, is a well-documented book about a famous Mormon assassin from the LDS point of view. Two LDS assassins were tried and executed, John D. Lee and Bill Hickman. Also, look at the book called MORMONISM, MOMMA AND ME by Thelma Geer; Lee’s great-great granddaughter who is now a Christian!

Another element of blood atonement is found in the LDS temple rites, even AS RECENTLY AS APRIL OF 1990. In their rites, temple Mormons swear not to reveal the secrets of the temple on penalty of having their lives taken.

#14— The Body of Christ, Explained For an LDS

The only "true" Church of Jesus Christ is His Body. The Church of Jesus Christ is not an organization, it is a living Body of believers. Rom. 12:5 says, "So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another." Elsewhere, Paul writes,

1Cor. 12:12-17 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?

See, the essence of a living body is diversity! Your body wouldn’t work too well if it was all one big spleen; or one big kidney. It is made up of hundreds of different and discrete parts which all function together in accord with the head (or brain). A hand looks radically different from a liver, yet both are part of the same body. Both have the same DNA code in their cells!

This is just like Christianity. A Baptist church might look different from a Methodist or Presbyterian church, but yet inside, they have the same "DNA code," the Holy Spirit! They all function under the head, Jesus Christ! There is no earthly head of the true Christian church! Only Jesus is its head.

The LDS church, on the other hand, is like the gigantic spleen mentioned above. All a spleen can do is lay there and drip all over your carpet! It cannot do anything without the rest of the body, to say nothing of the head!

The differences you see in churches are not signs of evil, but of strength. As Solomon says in Ecclesiastes 4:12 "… a threefold cord is not quickly broken." For more on this, please see our tract, "The Only True Church."

#15— Book of Abraham

It is interesting that you should be so concerned about the Book of Abraham, since that was a major source of concern for my wife (also ex-LDS). She had studied the various forms of Egyptian for several years because of an interest in the Egyptian culture. However, I made the mistake of getting her a Christmas present which was Hugh Nibley’s book, THE MESSAGE OF THE JOSEPH SMITH PAPYRI: AN EGYPTIAN ENDOWMENT.

In studying the book and going back to the Book of Abraham, she was astonished to find little correspondence between the way Joseph Smith had translated the text and the actual meaning of the Egyptian characters. She looked at the reproductions you mention which are in the Triple Combo and said that Smith was totally off in his interpretations! Needless to say, from that time on, she became less and less enchanted with Mormonism.

Now here is the actual situation with the Book of Abraham which I picked up later after a year and a half of research and a lot of help from my wife. In November of 1967, the papyrus which Smith used for his translation was found in Chicago, after having thought to have been lost for years. Well-known LDS scholar Dr. Hugh Nibley admitted, upon examining it, that "The papyrus scripts given to the Church do not prove the Book of Abraham is true."1 That is the understatement of the year.

Even his book, mentioned above, does such a poor job in trying to defend Joseph Smith’s translation that the Church has been unwilling to endorse it, even though it is published by Deseret Publishing. In fact, Francis Gibbs, then secretary to the First Presidency, wrote Baptist minister to Mormons John L. Smith and stated "…the writings of Dr. Hugh Nibley concerning the papyri scrolls have been done entirely on his own responsibility, and do not have the official approval and sanction of the church."2

Although this is an involved story, the basics which you would need to know is that Nibley, in 1967, asked fellow LDS Dee Jay Nelson, who claimed to have a PhD., to help translate the scrolls. Nelson came to the conclusion that Joseph didn’t get one character right on the entire scroll; and that basically it had nothing to do with Abraham at all, but was a funeral text!

Although Mormon scholars originally stated that Nelson’s "competence in both Egyptian and Semitic languages is unquestioned,"3 it later developed that Nelson’s doctorate was from a diploma mill in Seattle. When this was discovered, the Mormons tried to make a lot of mileage out of the fact that Nelson was "discredited." LDS people may hear this from their leaders. However, what their leaders will not tell them is that although Nelson’s academic credentials were discredited, his translation of the papyrus was not! In fact, it was quite good!

The Ogden Standard Examiner investigated the controversy surrounding Nelson’s credentials and competence. They contacted the leading expert in the US on Egyptology, Dr. Klaus Baer of the University of Chicago Oriental Institute. Dr. Baer was quoted as saying that although Nelson had no formal training in Egyptology, "he had certainly learned Egyptian somewhere."4 He described Nelson as "having a good amateur knowledge of Egyptian. He can translate hieroglyphics, but not without error…As to the papyri in question, Nelson’s translation is ‘essentially’ correct."5

That means that Joseph Smith’s translation is essentially incorrect! Dr. Baer provided his own translation of the papyri which was published in the "liberal" Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought.6 Although too lengthy to quote here, it bears no resemblance to Smith’s Book of Abraham! Another Egyptologist, Dr. Richard A. Parker of Brown University published his translation, which almost totally agrees with Dr. Baer’s and which bears absolutely no resemblance to the Book of Abraham!7

The bottom line is that both scholars’ translations are around 75 words! Look at the Book of Abraham, it has thousands of words! Joseph could somehow milk dozens of words out of one Egyptian character! For example, one character in the papyri which looks kind of like a backwards "E" is translated by Smith as Abraham 1:13-14! That is 76 words in those verses alone! The character actually is only part of a word and means something to do with water. The word "water" does not even appear in the two verses cited of Joseph’s translation!8

In the over 20 years since the papyri came to light, and not one LDS defender has been able to explain how Joseph Smith managed to derive the Book of Abraham from a 70+ word pagan funeral text! The bottom line is that Smith knew nothing of Egyptian and obviously had no "divine" help in translating the papyri.

1 From an article in the BYU newspaper, The Daily Universe, December 1, 1967. 2 Letter dated August 22, 1975, cited in Tanners’ MORMONISM: SHADOW OR REALITY, p.307. 3 Richley H. Crapo, Book of Abraham Symposium, April 30, 1970, p.27. 4 Ogden Standard Examiner (March 29, 1980) article by Charles F. Trentelman. 5 ibid. 6 Dialogue, Autumn, 1968, pp.119-120. 7 Dialogue, Summer 1968, p.98. 8 Jerald and Sandra Tanner, MORMONISM: SHADOW OR REALITY, p.324-25.

#16—The Book of Mormon and the Bible

1) Does the Book of Mormon contradict Mormon theology? The answer, of course, is yes it does. For a fairly comprehensive study on this, see our tract, Those Plain and Precious Things, which goes into this. For example, Mormons teach that God was once a man who evolved into godhood through obedience to the laws and ordinances of the "gospel."

However, in the Book of Mormon, 3 Nephi 24:6 agrees exactly with the Bible (Malachi 3:6), which says: "I am the LORD, I change not..." Obviously, if God never changes, He cannot evolve. Mormon 9:9 says "God is the same, yesterday, today, and forever." Mormon 9:19 asks "Why has God ceased to be a God of miracles and yet be an unchangeable being?" Moroni 8:18 says God "...is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity." This is just a couple of quick examples. There are a couple of dozen others in the tract.

2) Can the Book of Mormon be proven by history or archaeology? Of course, the answer is no. But the Bible most certainly can! We recommend EVIDENCE THAT DEMANDS A VERDICT by Josh McDowell, which has some really powerful statistics on how many things in the Bible have been proven by archaeological evidence. There a literally thousands of artifacts (coins, ruins of cities, inscriptions, etc.) which support the Bible’s truth. There is no such proof for the Book of Mormon.

The official position of BYU archaeologists is and has been for years that there is not any real evidence of Book of Mormon civilizations in Pre-Columbian America. In fact, many LDS scholars like Matheny and Arrington have actually gone on record as saying that it doesn’t even matter if the Book of Mormon is true or not, or if archaeology backs it up; because it’s "true, even if it isn’t literally true."

We have an excellent tape that goes into this area by Jim Witham (T05), plus some material in the important booklet, The Massive Mormon Scripture Mess. It can be a helpful area. In a related area, you could get the booklet, A Biologist Looks at the Book of Mormon, written by a scientist with several earned degrees who shows all the historical and scientific impossibilities in the Book of Mormon (such as the presence of cows, oxen, horses or goats "for the use of man" in 400 BC, about 1800 years before the European colonists brought them over).

3) Changes in the Book of Mormon. Although the book is scarcely 158 years old, there have been thousands of corrections in it already, even though it was supposedly translated by a "prophet" letter by letter. Point out that in 4000 years there is less than a half-percent error rate in the Old Testament, (and none of those errors are doctrinally significant) while there is a 5% error rate in the Book of Mormon in only a mere century and a half! That means the Book of Mormon has 1000% of the errors in the Bible, in only 3% of the passage of time. Not very good!

4) Is the Book of Mormon a testimony of ANOTHER Jesus? The answer is yes! See especially 3 Nephi 8-10 where their Jesus wipes out millions of people on Good Friday instead of forgiving them, as he forgave those who crucified Him in Jerusalem.

5) Does the Book of Mormon’s existence correspond to Bible-based truth? The answer is no. Although Mormons cite a few scriptures like Ezek.37:16-20 and Isaiah 29:4-5, none of which stand up to close examination (See our tract, Does the Bible Prophesy the Book of Mormon?). Also the very essence of the Book of Mormon’s existence is that the Bible somehow needs "help"—that it, alone, is inadequate or lacks some key teachings—indeed has been corrupted over the centuries. Many Bible verses, some from the very mouth of the Lord Jesus, deny this concept by proclaiming the eternal and inerrant nature of the Bible text (see Mt.5:18, 1 Pet.1:25, Is.40:8, 51:6, Ps.119:89; 12:6-7; 19:7-8; 111:7; Lk.16:17)

#17—Getting a Book of Mormon Reprint.

As far as getting a copy of a Deseret Books sesquicentennial publication of the Book of Mormon, they are now extremely scarce. The LDS church stopped publishing them in about 1986 when they realized that their market to the Mormons was nonexistent and their main buyers were the ex-Mormon groups and we were using them to lead Mormons to Jesus.

Jim Spencer, author of An Elders Story sells a photocopied reprint of one, I think for $20. You can reach him at Through the Maze Ministries, Box 8656, Boise, ID. 83707 or on the Internet at jspencer@micron.net

You can also get a copy of the Mormon-published book, JOSEPH SMITH BEGINS HIS WORK, vol.1, which contains a photomechanical reprint of the original edition.

#18— Can there be faults in the Book of Mormon?

Mormon missionaries are asking people to lay aside the Holy Bible, a book with a literal carload of archaeological proofs for a book which has no more historical validity than, say, Never-never-land or the land of Oz. If I were not an ex-Mormon, what could a Mormon tell me that would convince me to lay aside the Bible and trust the Book of Mormon and other LDS scriptures?

This is especially true when the Bible says of itself that it is perfect (Mt.5:18, 1 Pet.1:25, Is.40:8, 51:6, Ps.119:89; 12:6-7; 19:7-8; 111:7; Lk.16:17, etc.).

On the other hand, the Book of Mormon says of itself:

"And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment seat of Christ." (Title page, Book of Mormon, 1981 edition)

Thus, we know that the Bible is perfect from its own testimony, and we also know that the Book of Mormon may well be flawed, by its own testimony. To any fair and impartial observer, it would seem that the Bible was the more reliable text; just on the basis of this fact.

#19— Contradictions in Book of Mormon

If the Book of Mormon is such a perfect book theologically, why does it deny all the unique doctrines of the LDS church? Why does Mormonism teach that there are three gods in the Godhead, when the Book of Mormon (AND the Bible) teaches that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are one God? (2 Nephi 31:21, Mosiah 3:5 & 7:27, Alma 18:28 and 3 Nephi 11:27, 40)

Why does Doctrine & Covenants 130:3 teach that the indwelling of the Father and the Son in a believer’s heart is false, when the Book of Mormon (Alma 34:36) teaches that the Lord does dwell in our heart? Which is it?

If the Book of Mormon is the "most correct book ever written" as Joseph Smith taught, then why does it DENY the Mormon doctrine of "Eternal Progression?" If "Man is as God once was, and As God is, man may one day become" then God was once a man, right? But if God was once a man, then he must have changed, right? Yet the Book of Mormon in 3 Nephi 24:6 says, "I am the Lord, I change not" Mormon 9:9 says that "God is the same yesterday, today and forever." Mormon 9:19 and Moroni 8:18 also teach that God never changes. Now which is it? Did God once change into God, or did God never change? BOTH can’t be true!

If the Book of Mormon is the "most correct book ever written", then why does it so solidly condemn the taking of more than one wife; a cardinal doctrine that Joseph Smith taught? (Jacob 1:15, 2:22-27, 3:5; Mosiah 11:2, Ether 10:5). If God cannot change (3 Nephi 24:6 and Malachi 3:6) then if he hated polygamy in the days of Jacob, he hated it just as bad in 1840, and Joseph Smith was an adulterous sinner!

#20— Significant Changes in the Book of Mormon

For most of the LDS church’s 150 year history, it was staunchly maintained by the church leaders that there were no changes in the Book of Mormon of a doctrinal nature. Indeed, Joseph Fielding Smith warned in 1961 that:

...there was not one thing in the Book of Mormon or in the second edition or in any other edition since that in any way contradicts the first edition, and such changes as were made were made by the prophet Joseph Smith because under those adverse conditions the Book of Mormon was published. But there was no change of doctrine. Now, these sons of Belial who circulate these reports evidently know better. I will not use the word that is in my mind.—The Improvement Era, Dec.1961, pp.924-925.

Although there are 3,913+ changes in the Book of Mormon; not all of them are minor. Although the recent "line" on the changes in the Book of Mormon from the LDS church is that all the changes are unimportant; actual examination does not bear this out—especially when one considers the contention by Joseph Smith himself (see Saint’s Herald, November 15, 1962, p.16.) that the golden plates were supposedly translated letter-by-letter "by the power of God." (HISTORY OF THE CHURCH, vol 1, p.54-55)

Typos are one thing, profound changes in doctrine, major errors in consistency and common sense are quite another. (Changed parts are highlighted)

DOCTRINAL PROBLEMS:

1) Title page: (both versions) 1830: "...by Joseph Smith, jr., author and proprietor" Today: "translated by Joseph Smith, jr."

2) First Book of Nephi, p.25 (1830): "Behold, the virgin which thou seest, is the mother of God, after the manner of the flesh." Today: 1 Nephi 11:18: "...is the mother of the Son of God."

3) First Book of Nephi, p.25 (1830):."...behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Eternal Father!" Today: 1 Nephi 11:21: "yea, even the Son of the Eternal Father!"

4) First Book of Nephi, p.26 (1830): "And I looked and beheld the Lamb of God, that he was taken by the people; yea, the Everlasting God was judged of the world..." Today: 1 Nephi 11:32: "...yea, the Son of the Everlasting God was judged of the world..."

5) First Book of Nephi, p.32; (1830): "...that the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father and the Saviour of the world." Today: "..the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father and the Savior of the world."

6) Second Book of Nephi, p.37; (1830): "..and the mean man boweth down, and the great man humbleth himself not..."(cf. Is.2:6-9) Today: 2 Nephi 12:9: "and the mean man boweth not down and the great man humbleth himself not..."

7) Second Book of Nephi, p.117; (1830): "and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and delightsome people." Today: 2 Nephi 30:6: "and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a pure and delightsome people."

8) Book of Alma, p.236; (1830): "I know that Jesus Christ shall come; yea the Son of the only begotten of the Father..." Today: Alma 5:48: "I know that Jesus Christ shall come; yea the Son,[?] the only begotten of the Father..."

9) Book of Alma, p.303; (1830): "yea, I know that he allotteth unto men, yea, decreeth unto them decrees which are unalterable,. according to their wills.. " Book of Mormon (1950):Alma 29:4:"yea, I know that he allotteth unto men [?].according to their wills.. " Today: Alma 29:4: "yea, I know that he allotteth unto men, yea, decreeth unto them decrees which are unalterable, according to their wills.. "

10) Book of Alma p.315; (1830): "But behold, as the seed swelleth and sprouteth and beginneth to grow, and then ye must needs say, That seed is good; for behold, it swelleth and sprouteth and beginneth to grow." Today: Alma 32:30: "But behold, as the seed swelleth and sprouteth and beginneth to grow, and then ye must needs say, That seed is good; for behold, it swelleth and sprouteth and beginneth to grow. And now behold, will not this strengthen your faith? Yea, it will strengthen your faith: for ye will say that I know that this is a good seed; for behold, it sprouteth and beginneth to grow."

11) Book of Alma p.328; (1830): "yea, and that ye preserve these directors." Today: Alma 37:21: "yea, and that ye preserve these interpreters."

12) Book of Alma p.328; (1830): "And now my son, these directors were prepared that the word of God might be fulfilled..." Today: Alma 37:24: "And now my son, these interpreters were prepared that the word of God might be fulfilled..."

MAJOR ERRORS IN LOGIC, CONSISTENCY OR GRAMMAR:

1) Book of Mosiah, p.200; (1830): "...on learning from the mouth of Ammon that king Benjamin had a gift from God..." Today: Mosiah 21:28: "...on learning from the mouth of Ammon that king Mosiah had a gift from God..."

2) Book of Mosiah, p.214; (1830): "My soul was wrecked with eternal torment..." Today: Mosiah 27:29: "My soul was racked with eternal torment..."

3) Book of Alma, p.260; (1830): "Behold, the Scriptures are before you; if ye will arrest them, it shall be to your own destruction." (also p.336) Today: Alma 13:20: "Behold, the Scriptures are before you; if ye will wrest them, it shall be to your own destruction."

4) Book of Alma, p.270; (1830): "And it came to pass, when they had arriven in the borders of the land..." (also p.443) Today: Alma: 17:13: "And it came to pass, when they had arrived in the borders of the land..."

5) Book of Alma, p.278; (1830): "the multitude beheld that the man had fell dead..." (also p.310) Today: Alma 19:24: "the multitude beheld that the man had fallen dead..."

6) Book of Alma, p.299; (1830): "Now when Ammon and his brethren saw this work of destruction among those who they so dearly beloved, and among those who had so dearly beloved them..." Today: Alma 27:4: "Now when Ammon and his brethren saw this work of destruction among those whom they so dearly beloved, and among those who had so dearly beloved them..."

7) Book of Alma, p.351; (1830): "...he went forth among the people, waving the rent of his garment in the air, that all might see the writing which he had wrote upon the rent..." Today: Alma 46:19: "...he went forth among the people, waving the rent part of his garment in the air, that all might see the writing which he had written upon the rent part..."

8) Book of Alma, p.353; (1830): "to remove the cause of diseases which was subsequent to men by the nature of the climate" Today: Alma 46:40: "to remove the cause of diseases to which men were subject by the nature of the climate"

9) Book of Alma, p.388; (1830): "For behold, Ammon had sent to their support..." Today: Alma 57:17: "For behold, Ammoron had sent to their support..."

Many other citations could be given, but "out of the mouths of two or three witnesses..." it is evident that although the Lord supposedly dictated the Book of Mormon letter by letter, he could not spell, keep doctrine or characters straight, and even had serious problems with grammar and logic. What is even more bizarre, is the fact that still in the Book of Mormon, after all of these changes, there are still many just plain strange things like:

1) Jacob 7:27: "and to the reader I bid farewell, hoping that many of my brethren may read my words. Brethren, adieu." What is a French word doing in a document supposedly written by a Hebrew in America around 421 BC?

2) Helaman 9:6: "...when the judge had been murdered—he being stabbed by his brother by a garb of secrecy..." How can one be stabbed by a garb (garment)?

3) Alma 13:1: "...my brethren, I would cite your minds forward to the time when the Lord God gave these commandments unto his children..." How can you "cite" someone’s mind "forward" to something that happened in the past?

4) Alma 24:19: "...they buried their weapons of peace, or they buried the weapons of war for peace." What is a weapon of peace, and can it be the same as a weapon of war?

5) Alma 43:38: "they being shielded from the more vital parts of the body,..." How does one shield oneself from the vital parts of one’s own body?

6) Ether 15:31: "And it came to pass that after he had smitten off the head of Shiz, that Shiz raised up on his hands and fell; and after that he struggled for breath, he died." And we are asked to believe that God wrote this?

This brief study does not even take into account the many scientific impossibilities, anachronisms, and logical contradictions which yet remain in the Book of Mormon. Please see our booklet, "A Biologist Looks at the Book of Mormon" for exceptional references on those items.

#21— Cain & His Sin-Offering

About Cain and whether or not the term used means sin or sin offering(as Ed and Dave Hunt say in THE GOD MAKERS), the word in question in Gen.4:7 is, in Hebrew, ChaTATh. This word can be translated either sin, or sin offering; according to the best Greek scholars.1 It is so-translated in the King James Bible at least four times (Ex..29:14, Lev.6:26, 9:15, and Ps.40:6).2 I would readily admit that this is not a common interpretation of the verse; but it is by no means an isolated one. Helen Spurrell’s translation of the Old Testament scriptures from the original Hebrew renders it "sin-offering."3 It could hardly be called incorrect.

1 Spiros Zodhiates, THE HEBREW-GREEK KEY STUDY BIBLE, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, MI., 1984, p.7, citing STRONG’S HEBREW AND CHALDEE DICTIONARY, p.38; and WILSON’S OLD TESTAMENT WORD STUDIES, MacDonald Publishing, MacLean, VA., p.395. 2 Wilson’s, p.292-293. 3 Curtis Vaughn (gen.ed.), 26 TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE, vol.1, p.9.

#22—How can Protestants be called of God?

Basically, people who feel a calling to ministry do indeed usually hear in some fashion directly from God. It is God who is our "boss" and He ought to be in charge of the "hiring."

Usually, this call manifests itself through some sort of denominational structure. What I mean by that is that the called person will feel the prompting of the Holy Spirit and go to his pastor and discuss it. God will usually, with something as important as this, confirm the call with another servant of His. By that, I mean that your pastor should feel some sort of concord with you in this.

Most denominations have committees of Godly men who pray and review candidates for the ministry; and to have their witness added to your own is often comforting and sustaining. However, denominations do not call you—God calls you. All the denomination can and should do is publicly acknowledge and confirm what God has already done in your heart.

Sadly, some denominations have stopped listening to God, and just allowed their review process to become a bureaucracy which just processes forms and judges people on their education or their references. This is not good. Just because you don’t have a piece of paper from a church doesn’t mean that you aren’t called of God. That is a spiritual matter, and there are probably thousands of Godly men and women who have simply gone out and started preaching and have ended up doing a mighty work and leading thousands of souls into the kingdom without ever having the papers from some institution.

As to the call itself, it can come in many ways. Most of us don’t have a thunderbolt come out of heaven. Sometimes, it is a burning, impossible-to-ignore zeal to just go out and do it! Sometimes the Lord will speak to you in a still, small voice. Others have actually had visions. These things do happen, and as long as what is conveyed measures up to the Bible (obviously, Joseph Smith’s vision didn’t); they can be perfectly valid.

I had a vision of sorts during (of all things) my testimony before my stake high council court upon leaving the LDS church in which the Lord both showed me some things and spoke to me and called me to be an evangelist to the lost in cults. Now, it wasn’t anything as intense as Paul’s. I didn’t fall out of my chair and lay transfixed on the floor of the stake center for five minutes. No, in just His own special, quiet way, the Lord spoke to me, even as I was speaking to them; and showed me what He had for me to do.

Another way you can tell is by fruits. If a man or woman is called of God, there will be fruits to their ministry. Souls will be brought into the kingdom; lives will be changed. Many people just go out on Friday or Saturday night and start preaching on street corners and end up building a huge church without ever meaning to. God has been gracious enough to bring some small fruit from my ministry, so I know that my experience was genuine.

This is a long way of saying, yes—ministers of the gospel of Jesus Christ do receive a direct calling from God; although in some cases it is more subtle than others. We are all unique, and God speaks to us in different ways. Sometimes, even through other people. I know some cases where people (unsolicited) in the Body started coming up to a person and saying, "Gee, you’re really anointed; you ought to be a preacher." The person followed that, and made a dynamite preacher.

#23—Hebrews 1 and the Divine Nature of Jesus.

Hebrews 1:1-4 begins much like the gospel of John and the book of Genesis. All three begin with God. Genesis reveals that "in the beginning God created." John expands the revelation of Genesis by using the Word (logos) motif. Not only was the Word in the beginning, but it was with God, was God and was the agency by which all things were created.

The author of Hebrews expands the revelation further still, giving a clearer picture. It was God who spoke who spoke to our fathers by means of the prophets, and it is God who has spoken to us through His Son. There are several contrasts here worth noting. The first is the contrast between "time past" in vs.1 and "these last days" in vs.2.

Next is the contrast between "many portions and ways" (which is the literal Greek there) of vs.1 and the obvious lack of an explicit comparative. This would tell us that what God spoke to us through His Son is total, complete, all encompassing and final.

The last contrast here is between the plurality of the prophets and the utter singularity of the Son. This suggests the impossibility of communicating a comprehensive revelation of God through the prophets, no matter how many they were. Therefore, God has spoken to us who live in these latter-days through His Son.

The rest of the passage is a description of this Son. The first description has to do with primary verbal action in three ways: 1) We see the Son as the recipient of action in that God has appointed Him heir of all things(v.2). 2) He is the agency of action, since through Him God has "made the worlds." 3) He is the initiator of action in that He sat down and actively inherited a more excellent name than the angels and still inherits that name.

The second description has to do with the revealing nature of the Son. This is accomplished through the use of participles which not only reveal the nature of the Son, but also set the sequential time frame of His action. The use of these participles can be illustrated within the framework of a grammatical diagram:

"...Who sat down on the right hand of the greatness in high places 1) while He was being the radiance of the glory 2) while He was being the image/point of the reality of God 3) while He was bearing all things by the word of His ability 4) after He made (of his own free will) a cleansing for sin."

The action of the Son is seen in the words sat down. The participial phrases are introduced with the words "while" and "after." The first three are present tenses, indicating that the Son is CONTINUOUSLY being the radiance of the Father’s glory, is CONTINUOUSLY being the image/point of the reality of the Father, and is CONTINUOUSLY bearing all things by the Word of His ability.

Please notice that the Son sat down while He was being the radiance and the image/point and while bearing. His making a cleansing for sins is finished and will not be repeated. Please note that the Son sat down after He did this.

But let’s look a two words that appear in vs.3. They are (literally, from the Greek) "image/point" (caraktor) and "reality" (upostasews). The word "image" (charakter) was used to describe a tool for engraving. In this sense, it meant to "cut to a point, to sharpen, to scratch," giving us the concept of a die. It later came to mean "to inscribe." It finally came to denote the mark or image that was made by the engraving tool or die, with special references to any distinguishing characteristics. In this sense, it would refer to an exact representation or exact reproduction.

The word "reality" (hupostaseos) is a philosophical term with roots extending into other fields. In medicine, it was used to describe that which settles to the bottom of a specimen bottle. Scientists used it to refer to sediment which ultimately forms a solid foundation. Astrologers in those days used it to describe that which lies behind all natural phenomena. Greek philosophers used it to describe the substance of unformed being prior to any specific science.

We’ve got to understand that through all of the Bible we NEVER see God coming to man in the full panoply of His glory. Doing so would have been to blast us into atoms! He always came to man in a veiled Presence. And in these last days, He has come to us in His Son, in whom dwells the fullness of the Godhead in bodily form (Col.2:9). There are thus several ways that one can grasp the nature of Jesus Christ, none of which really grasp it.

From the author of Hebrews’ language, we could say that Jesus is the sharpened point of all reality or of all that God is, and that beyond this sharpened point lies all of the inexhaustible resources of God. And Jesus is the exact point of entry into them.

We could also say that Jesus is the essence of all that God is. Jesus said that to see Him is to see the Father; therefore in Jesus we see, in essence form, all that God is, for we could not comprehend the fullness of God in any other way. Being able to do that, would be to become God. All we can withstand is the exact representation, the essence, the sharpened point (or focus) of the full reality of God.

#24—What the Mormons think of Christ

Thank you for sending us a copy of the LDS pamphlet, "What the Mormons Think of Christ." To answer your question, no they have not changed their beliefs. In fact, the pamphlet is old. It was being handed out when I was a Mormon in the early 1980’s and had been around awhile then. The problem with the pamphlet is that it, like virtually everything the Mormons give out to the "gentiles," (non-LDS) is very subtle and deceptive. However, if you can wade through the pious-sounding rhetoric, you will find the same old Mormon heresies imbedded in the text. I’m underlining some of the key passages for you and returning a photocopy of it to you with my comments.

Right on page 1 we have a subtle allusion to the LDS doctrine that God the Father conceived Jesus the same "literal" way we were conceived by our parents—through physical intimacy with Mary. Like much in this pamphlet, it doesn’t come out and say that, but a Mormon (or an ex-Mormon) reading it would recognize the teaching.

On pp.2-3, we have a delicate but real attack on the inerrancy of the Bible; and bring up the common Mormon lie about "many translations and versions" of the Bible which vary from one another. The Mormon writer does not tell you that there is not a dime’s worth of difference between most true Bible translations or versions; any more than that there is any real difference between an English Book of Mormon and a German Book of Mormon.

Page 9 contains another subtle teaching of the blasphemous doctrine of God having sex with Mary to produce Jesus. Aside from numerous quotations from the LDS scriptures (which are fraudulent) the next 18 pages are relatively innocuous. The Mormon author knows that few people will have the patience to finish the entire pamphlet, and so puts his best foot forward first and saves the big heresies for the end.

Page 27 begins the assault upon the glorious Pauline doctrine of salvation by grace and grace alone (Eph.2:8-9; Rom.3:20-23; 6:23, 11:6). The LDS teaching is clearly promulgated here that it is by faith and obedience that we are saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Mormon gospel.

Page 28 teaches the damnable lie that salvation by grace is only salvation from death through resurrection, and that that is all that Jesus’ sacrifice bought us. Page 29 continues the conditional nature of the Mormons’ "grace" by teaching "IF ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness…THEN is his grace sufficient for you…" In other words, grace is free, but it must be earned through obedience (???)

Page 31 begins the assault in earnest, under the heading "The Blood of Christ." Here you will see that the Bible doctrine of salvation by trusting in the blood of Jesus is called "…such utter nonsense and so palpably false that to believe it is to lose one’s salvation." No, the Mormons haven’t changed.

In the final paragraph, the Mormons even try to move the atonement away from the cross (which the devil hates to mention) to the Garden of Gethsemane. It says that there Jesus took on the sins of the world "conditionally" which is utterly false. There was nothing conditional about the atonement, nor did it take place anywhere but on Calvary’s hill. (John 19:30). When Jesus said, "It is finished," He meant it! He paid the bill in full at that moment! He did not say, "It is finished, but…" John 6:47 says that we who believe in Him "HAVE" eternal life—present tense—right now!

Pages 32-33 continue the heresy by reasserting that there are "conditions" attached to the atoning blood of Christ, and that those conditions are (beyond faith) baptism, and "enduring to the end."

Page 35 moves on, teaching the heretical LDS doctrine of "pre-existence" that we were all born spiritually to a heavenly Father and heavenly Mother before we can to earth to get our physical tabernacles (bodies). From here on, things get pretty tame again; although there is a nasty slam against "sectarian dogmatism" (ie. Biblical Christianity) on the bottom of page 43.

Page 44 contains another denial of the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Page 45 contains further blasphemy by linking faith in Christ with faith in His supposed Latter-day prophets. In simpler words, you can’t believe in Jesus without believing in Joseph Smith, which adds still another "condition" to salvation.

The pamphlets ends with a resounding lie, promising the potential Mormon a "…sure hope of eternal exaltation in the life to come." Translated out of "Mormonese," that means that Mormons have a sure hope of attained godhood in eternity; and nothing could be further from the truth. Aside from the fact that no man can become a god, since there is now and ever shall be only one God (Deut.6:4, Isaiah 43:10); I have yet to meet an actual Mormon who even has the "sure hope."

No Mormon, not even the saintliest old stake patriarch has a "sure hope" of attaining exaltation. Most Mormons I knew frankly admitted that they were reasonably certain they would never make it to exaltation; and the statistics from the Church’s own records bear that out. No Mormon knows when they are going when they die; because all they have to trust in is "conditional" salvation—conditional in their own righteousness, which the Bible says are as "filthy rags" in the sight of a holy and just God (Isaiah 64:6).

No, the Mormons haven’t changed.

# 25 —God Makers Producers

1) The producers of the video were from several different Christian backgrounds. The actual head of Jeremiah Films is Pat Matrisciana, who is a Conservative Baptist who has been making films for the Christian community for about 20 years.

The film was financed by donations through hundreds of supporters (from virtually every Christian denomination) of the ministries of two other men. Ed Decker, the first, is an ex-Mormon of nearly 20 years, who now attends the Assembly of God church. The other is Jim Spencer, also a former Mormon elder for about 10 years; recently resigned a pastorate with the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel to become a full-time evangelist with the same fellowship.

2) The reference sources for the items mentioned by the "Mormon couple" in the video are all from recognized books by authoritative Mormon authors. The vast majority of the citations are contained within "Do They Really Believe That?" in the Resource section, which was actually compiled from the research done for the video. Efforts were made to insure that, whenever possible, quotes would be from contemporary LDS books readily accessible by most active, devout LDS members.

The books include the "Standard Works" of the LDS Church—ie. books regarded as divine scripture equal to, or better than, the Holy Bible: Book of Abraham from the Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants. Also included are Mormon Doctrine by the late LDS "apostle" Bruce R. McConkie; a reference book highly regarded by Mormons for thirty years now; and the Achieving Celestial Marriage Manual which is the official textbook for the Mormon church’s temple preparation classes; and the "Melchizedek Priesthood Manual," which is the official textbook published by the LDS Church for the weekly training of their elders’ quorums.

3) THE GOD MAKERS film was produced by Jeremiah Films also (see above); with financial involvement by Ed Decker and also several prominent Christian businessmen who helped put up some of the considerable cost of the film. These men were from numerous denominations.

4) Jeremiah Films has some other excellent films on cult groups; including WITNESS AT YOUR DOOR, about the Jehovah’s Witnesses; GODS OF THE NEW AGE, about the New Age movement; and their "Pagan Invasion Series" which has several hour-long segments on Satanism, Halloween, and Wicca (so-called "white" witchcraft).

# 26—Doctrinal Essentials

Thank you very much for your letter. I am a former temple Mormon myself, and am delighted to answer your letter. There is a considerable difference between LDS (Mormon) doctrines and the doctrines in the Bible. To briefly deal with the ones you asked about: 1) The Trinity—Mormons deny it exists. They claim that the Godhead is a "three-god" committee of sorts. The Bible says that there is one God and one God alone, manifesting in three Persons: (Deut.6:4; Isaiah 43:10-11, 44:6-8, 45:5-6, 12; 46:5, 9; Hebrews 6:13; 1 Timothy 2:5, 1 John 5:7). 2) The Deity of Christ—Mormons only believe that Jesus is "our elder brother." There is no qualitative difference between us and Him, except He is older and smarter and more perfect. To the Mormon, Jesus is uniquely NOT Almighty God, but just A god. The Bible says that Jesus is Almighty God! (John 1:1-14, 8:58, 10:30, Colossians 1:15-19, 2:9; 1 Timothy 3:16; 1 John 2:22, 4:1-3; Revelations 1:7-8, 22:13-16). 3) The Virgin Birth—Mormons deny that Jesus was born of a virgin, because they teach that God the Father had sex with Mary to conceive Him. Obviously that would destroy Mary’s virginity; and obviously, that is contrary to the Bible (See 1:18 and Luke 1:35 which clearly teach that the Holy Spirit is behind the conception of Jesus) 4) Salvation by grace through faith—Mormons deny it. They say you are saved by grace "…after all you can do." (2 Nephi 25:23) This is borne out by their 3rd article of faith, which says that we are saved "through obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel." Hopefully, you can see that this is utterly contrary to the Biblical doctrine of salvation by grace through faith, and faith alone as a free gift! (Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 6:23, 3:20, 28, 10:9-13; Galatians 2:16, 21; Hebrews 10:38) 5) The Inspired Word of God—Mormons deny that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God (without mistakes)—see their 8th article of faith which only says the Bible is the Word of God insofar "…as it is translated correctly." Contrary to Mormon thought, the Bible cannot be changed or tampered with and is the inspired Word of God (Psalm 12:6-7; 19:7-8; 111:7; 119:89; 138:2; Isaiah 40:8, 51:6: Matthew 5:18; Luke 16:17; 2 Timothy 3:16; 1 Peter 1:25). They also fail to understand the Biblical principle that any modern prophets must be judged by the Bible (Isaiah 8:20). #27- Damning your Enemies: LDS Oath of Vengeance

During the LDS Temple ritual, certain oaths and covenants are made before God that are said to be both solemn and eternal. All participants are required to verbally take every oath. One such oath, which was part of the ritual until it was removed in early 1927, was called The Oath of Vengeance. It was actually sworn against the United States of America in retribution for the deaths of Joseph and Hyrum Smith.

"You and each of you do solemnly promise and vow that you will pray, and never cease to importune high heaven to avenge the blood of the prophets on this nation, and that you will teach this to your children and your children’s children unto the third and fourth generation.

The oath was quietly removed from the ritual without ceremony or announcement. (Chuck Sackett, What's Going On In There, page 62. letter rescinding oath, Apostle George. F. Richards, 2/15/1927).

While this oath was removed and Mormonism moved further into general acceptance, the oath itself was an eternally binding one, given in the holiest of places, under the power of their eternal Melchizedek priesthood. Under those eternal circumstances, the vow once taken could not be undone.

# 28—Saving Faith

What do Mormons mean by "faith?" First of all, the Jesus in whom they ask you to believe is fake; which is a pretty big problem right there. Beyond that though, the Mormon concept of faith is scripturally defective.

James 2:19 says that the "devils believe" but obviously they are not saved.(See Mt.8:29 for further proof that the demons acknowledged Jesus’ divinity). There are several levels of faith in Jesus (assuming you’ve got the right One!) a) Belief in a historical Jesus as an historical person. This cannot save; anymore than believing George Washington lived can save you. b) Belief that Jesus is God Almighty and can be prayed to, and can heal or answer prayers. This is the way the devils in Jas.2:19 or Mt.8:29 believed. The Mormons do NOT believe Jesus is Almighty God, and they do not pray to Him.

Otherwise, though, this more or less describes their faith level. It cannot save them, because there is another: c) Belief that Jesus died on the cross for your sins and rose from the dead; and that only He can save you from hell.(Rom.10:9-13) Note that the 9th verse says "believe in thine heart." This is not head belief (b), but heart belief. This is saving faith—the acknowledgment that there is nothing I can do to get to heaven, but trust in Jesus and His righteousness.

If the Mormons had stopped with "Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ" and had the right Jesus, they would be fine, but they add to the gospel! They say, in effect, I believe Jesus can save me, but... They say that although He said "It is finished!" on Calvary(Jn.19:30), that there is more they have to do. They are not satisfied with His death on the cross and think that they can improve upon it! That is not saving faith!

It is like saying, "I know that chair exists across the room. I believe that if I sit in it that it will support my weight, but just to be certain, I’m going to not put my full weight in it." This is like receiving the FREE GIFT of eternal life. Saving faith, in the case of the chair, would mean that you would totally relax into it, utterly confident that it would not collapse. Mormons are not willing to do that with Jesus. They are saying, "I believe Jesus can save me, but I must also get the Holy Ghost, go to the temple, be sealed...etc."

That is failing to have total faith in Christ and His "finished" work on the cross! If Jesus finished it, then all we can do is muck it up, which is what the Mormons have done.

#29—Family and Marriage

Here there are not large differences, except in the eternal or eschatological (Last things) sense. Both LDS and Christians revere and respect the family as a God-ordained institution; and both believe in chastity before marriage and fidelity within marriage. The notable exception to fidelity for LDS is the doctrine of plural marriage in Mormonism which is now not being "officially" practiced, although there are tens of thousands of polygamous marriages in Utah. Nevertheless, Joseph Smith violated both his marriage vows by consummating "celestial marriages" with many women (some of them in their early teens!) and by "marrying" other men’s wives himself. Mormons, of course, believe this was ordained of God; but God does not bless fornication or adultery.

Both Mormons and Christian regard children as blessings from God and stand firmly against abortion. Mormons also oppose all forms of artificial birth control, which is less commonly taught among evangelicals.

The big difference is that Mormons believe in eternal marriage, and that if they are worthy they will continue to be married and have children throughout eternity. This contrary to the clear teaching of Jesus: "For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven."—Mt.22:30. Also, it indulges in a subtle form of idolatry; since it virtually replaces God as the centerpiece of heaven with the family!

The Bible, in the book of Revelation, gives a clear picture of life in the heavenly Kingdom. It consists of worshipping God and praising Him throughout eternity! (Rev.4:8-11, 5:6-14, 7:9-17, 11:15-18, 15:2-4, 19:1-9) You will search the Bible from cover to cover and not find anything which indicates that we will be married or raising families in heaven! That argument from silence, combined with Mt.22:30, is pretty compelling.

# 30—Fastest Growing Church?

Well, 250,000 people join it; but it seems that about the same number of people leave it—so we have, as we say in the states, a "revolving-door" situation. The Mormons’ growth in the USA amounts to only about 2-3% per year. That’s with the country blanketed by full time missionaries. The LDS church is growing but that growth now comes from overseas, that is undeniable, but I’m afraid that it is totally left behind in the dust by Christian churches. For example, the Assemblies of God, a Christian fellowship which is about 80 years younger in age than the LDS church is growing at speeds which just blow the LDS church out of the water.

The AOG, just one single Protestant denomination, with only about a dozen American missionaries......in just one country, Brazil, converted more than 400% of the entire world wide total of the LDS church conversions last year

250,000 LDS worldwide to 1,000,000 AOG Brazil.

In Fact, the AOG Church in just Brazil has over 10,000,000 members, 4 million more than the entire world wide LDS population

In Fact, The AOG/Brazil is building churches there at the rate of more than 50 per week, and the LDS Claim only 14 per week worldwide. The LDS church spends tens of millions per year in advertising, the AOG just a few thousand. Yet the AOG only claim to be members of the greater body of Christ, they claim no prophet or Seer at their head and only use The Bible as their canon of scripture. They profess the priesthood of the Believer.

LDS DOCTRINE: SOTERIOLOGY: # 31—FORGIVENESS (BRIEF)

I don’t know how long you’ve been in the Church, but if you read books like Spencer W. Kimball’s THE MIRACLE OF FORGIVENESS, you realize that no Mormon can possibly make the grade! The LDS system of works and repentance makes eternal life all but impossible.

The Church gives thousands of commandments to keep (see Bernard P. Brockbank, COMMANDMENTS AND PROMISES OF GOD, Deseret Books, 1983); and former "prophet" Kimball has written, This progress toward eternal life is a matter of achieving perfection. Living all the commandments guarantees total forgiveness of sins and assures one of exaltation through the perfection which comes by complying with the formula the Lord gave us. (Kimball, MIRACLE OF FORGIVENESS, p.208.) See that? Only by keeping ALL the commandments can you achieve exaltation! I don’t know if you have been through the temple yet, but I imagine you haven’t because of your age. In the endowment, which I experienced hundreds of times, the actor playing Lucifer turns to the audience of temple patrons and warns them: I have a word to say concerning these people. If they do not walk up to EVERY COVENANT they make at these altars in this temple today, they will be in my (Lucifer’s) power. Again, the same message: absolute perfection! Nothing less will do for a Mormon, especially a temple Mormon. And of course you cannot achieve your exaltation without the temple!

# 32— How Do I Become a Christian?

To become a member of the Body of Christ, to become a Christian, you only need to do these things: 1) Confess to God that you are a sinner (Romans 3:23) 2) Repent of those sins and be willing to turn away from them (Luke 13:5)

3) Believe that the REAL Lord Jesus Christ* died on the cross and shed His blood to pray the price for your sins, and that He rose again from the dead (Romans 10:9-10)

4) Ask the Lord to save you from your sins (Romans 10:13)

5) Ask Jesus Christ to take complete control over your life and be your Lord (Romans 12:1-2) Begin attending a Bible-believing church, and studying your Bible and talking with Jesus and His Father in prayer.

6) It is advisable to immediately (or as soon as possible) have your name removed from the LDS Church records by writing a letter to your bishop or stake president; and to pray to Jesus and renounce and confess all LDS priesthoods, blessings, covenants and temple sealings as sin. (2 Cor.6:14-18) For more on this important subject, see our booklet, "Exodus."

*Recall that the LDS Jesus is NOT the Jesus of the Bible. The true Jesus as taught in the Bible is Almighty God (John 1:1,14; Colossians 1:15-19) Himself, not just the Son of God; who atoned for your (and my) personal sins on the cross of Calvary, not in the Garden of Gethsemane (Ephesians 2:13-18, Colossians 1:20).

# 33—Why Do We have Free Will?

As to why God didn’t create an Adam and Eve who would have children who would totally serve and worship Him forever; I trust the answer is self evident. Two points: 1) Nothing in the Bible teaches that Adam and Eve could not have had children before the Fall. That is an assumption of Mormon theology which does not hold water. 2) God gave us free agency so that our love for Him and obedience to Him would be genuine. If you could somehow hypnotize a woman so that she would be forced to love you and be your absolute slave as your wife; what would her love mean to you? How quickly would you tire of such a companion!

Similarly, God made us with the ability to choose either good or evil so that our choice for Him would be meaningful, and, more important; that it would be an opportunity for us to grow spiritually. Now, obviously, man’s fall has caused all sorts of evils and problems; but the Bible shows that it is necessary for God to let the "drama" play itself out so that everyone, men and angels; will know that He loves us and wants the best for us—even at the terrible price of our free will.

Most parents come to realize this fact. They see that they cannot possibly keep their kids from ever making a mistake—to do that, they would have to keep them locked in a box all their lives; and they wouldn’t grow or learn. Thus most parents just teach their children by Word and example and then gradually help them to make their own, free-will decisions.

# 34— Mormon Fruits

Talking about the "fruits" of a church, we must read the entire context of the Bible verses! The passage is in Matthew 7, but lets look at the earlier verses:

Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheeps’ clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes, nor figs from thistles, are they? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit; but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits.—Matt.7:15-20.

Please note the first sentence. The Lord says that false prophets will come as wolves in sheeps’ clothing. This means that the wolves are concealing their outward appearance, right? This means the wolves will look outwardly very good—very "sheep-like," or Christian. As Paul says elsewhere, they DISGUISE themselves as ministers of righteousness (2 Cor. 11:13-15).

Therefore, the Mormons’ outward show cannot be trusted, but only their teachings, their doctrines—what is in their hearts! Deuteronomy 13:1-2 makes it clear that anyone who teaches a different god from the God of the Bible is a false prophet, it doesn’t matter how good he looks or how many prophecies of his are fulfilled. The prophet’s doctrine must be the test, and the Mormon doctrine is false!

# 35— Gamaliel‘s Advice?

Regarding Gamaliel’s (Acts 5:34) advice to the council, the Mormon’s point is, of course, that we should let Mormonism alone; and if it is not from God it would collapse in time, and if it is, then there is nothing we can do to stop it. This is not Biblical. First of all, the Bible commands us to "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." (Jude 3). It also tells us to make war against the principalities and powers of darkness and to cast down imaginations and every "high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God..."(Eph.6:12, 2 Cor.10:4-5) Dear friend, you are not our enemy; but the demonic forces which hold you in bondage and prevent you from seeing the REAL Jesus!

In the light of these scriptures, and others; we cannot let Mormonism alone, anymore than a doctor could let a cancerous tumor alone. Error must be responded to, and precious souls like yours must be saved by the blood and grace of Jesus Christ!

It should be obvious to you that Gamaliel’s advice in Acts 5 is not of God, simply from a look at history. Roman Catholicism, which I imagine you regard as a false church, has prospered for almost 2000 years, and today has 900 million members, to your church’s measly 7.5 million. By Gamaliel’s test, this would make the RC church a work of God. Similarly, Hinduism has been around for 6000 years and today has close to a billion adherents! Surely, if it was not of God, it would have failed millenia ago! Islam, which has been around for 1400 years and has more than a billion followers, nearly swallowed up Christianity alive in the early middle ages. Surely it must be a work of God!

You see how false this line of thinking can be? All of these religions have had success and longevity which makes Mormonism look puny by comparison. You see the sad fact is that error has always been more popular than truth. Mormonism is so successful because is plays the devil’s game in the devil’s home court; and because it panders to man’s spiritual "lust" to be like God which was taught him by the serpent (Gen.3:4-5). Mormonism knows how to scratch the itching ears of people who want to do anything but follow Jesus and receive Him as Lord!(2 Tim.4:3)

# 36— Doing Genealogy

About genealogy, you are correct, of course. The Bible clearly disregards genealogies as useless and vain in the New Covenant of Jesus. The Mormons ignore those verses and instead lean heavily upon the Old Testament genealogies for their justification. They need to understand that Jesus’ is the last genealogy that is important, or even relevant!

The genealogies were only needed in the Mosaic covenant for the determining of who was worthy for the Levitical (or Aaronic) priesthood. As is made clear, Jesus’ New Covenant priesthood has nothing to do with genealogy (Heb.7:16) Since Jesus is our only High Priest (Heb.7:17-28), we don’t need genealogy anymore. Mormons, of course, believe that the genealogies are needed to research the dead so ordinances can be performed for their beloved relatives now dead who need them. There is no justification possible after death (Heb.9:27) I hope this explains it.

# 37—Bible Verses Which Clearly Monotheism.

Deut.6:4— Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD.

1 Kings 8:60—That all the people of the earth may know that the LORD is God, and that there is none else.

Isaiah 42:8— I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

Isaiah 43:10-11— 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. I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

Isaiah 44:6-8— Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. And who, as I, shall call, and shall declare it, and set it in order for me, since I appointed the ancient people? and the things that are coming, and shall come, let them show unto them. Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.

Isaiah 45:5-6, 12— I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else... I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.

Isaiah 46:5, 9— To whom will ye liken me, and make me equal, and compare me, that we may be like? …Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,

Mark 12:32-34— And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself… And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God.

John 17:3—And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

1 Cor. 8:6— But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Galatians 3:20— Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.

Eph. 4:6—One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

Hebrews 6:13— For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself,

1 Timothy 2:5— For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

1 John 5:7—For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

# 38—Is The Film Biased?

Your letter was forwarded to us by JEREMIAH FILMS, as Ed Decker, the head of our ministry, was one of the principle creators behind the film, "The God-Makers."

Although the film does feature many interviews by former Mormons, such content should not be considered as an impeachment of its validity—any more than Paul’s testimony about the Jewish people in Romans 9-11 should be discarded simply because he was a former Pharisee. If you would allow a comparison, it is very similar to recovered alcoholics standing up in an AA meeting and testifying about the dangers of liquor. They certainly should know whereof they speak!

Moreover, a couple of the speakers in the film are not ex-Mormons but rather renowned authorities on the subject from the Christian body (ie. John L. Smith and Dr. Charles Crane).

Naturally, the Mormon church would like to have everyone believe that the film is simply the work of disgruntled apostates who hate the church. Should you have an opportunity to attend our gatherings or conventions (yes, ex-Mormons do have conventions for fellowship and edification), you would rather find continued expressions of love and concern for the Mormon people and hearts broken by the grace of Jesus Christ for their lost souls!

If you would consult with authorities on the subject of cults in the Body of Christ such as Dr. Walter Martin, Dr. Ronald Enroth, or Dr. Donald Bloesch; you would find them in unanimous consent that "The God-Makers" presents an essentially accurate (if emotional) picture of both the serious doctrinal heresies of Mormonism (it is essentially updated Gnosticism) and the tragic impact the Church has on the lives of its members.

Perhaps the most telling testimony concerning the validity of the film is the deafening silence from the hierarchy of the Mormon church. The film has been out for eight years, and none of its assertions have been gainsaid by any official Church spokesman. Many minor league Mormons have tilted against it and broken their lances, but the Church apostles have not dared to speak out against the film, because they know it is true.

#39 . God and the great council in heaven

As the story unfolds, when it was time for Elohim to prepare the earth for occupancy, the Head of the gods called a Council of the gods and there the gods concocted the plan for earth. Elohim asked his two eldest sons--brothers (probably from Elohim's #1 wife), to prepare plans for the Council to review. These brothers were Jesus and Lucifer!

Upon review of the plans, the Council chose the plan of Jesus and he was raised to the position of godhood. Apparently, the vote was a close one, for Lucifer became angry over the decision. He led one- third of the children of Elohim into an open rebellion over the decision. They battled against one-third of the children who were in agreement with the Council decision. The other third of Elohim's children were obedient to the Council, but didn't want to get involved in the battle. They were not valiant in defending the decision.

It is hard to imagine how we fought without physical bodies, or why Elohim was unable to control his own children, but at the end of the fighting, those who fought for Jesus won. Lucifer and one third of our brothers and sisters were cast out from Kolob, and arrived here on earth as Satan and the demons.

Those who fought valiantly with Jesus would come to earth as the white and delightsome people--the more valiant we were, the blonder our hair; the whiter our skin. The less valiant we were, the darker our complexion and hair. That third who did not want to get involved became the black race, born under the curse of Cain. There were no neutrals in Kolob!

# 40—The Logic of God changing.

Logic and the Bible both dictate that God cannot change. Since God is perfect, if He were to change, He would become either more perfect (logically impossible for an already perfect Being) or less perfect (morally impossible). Oddly enough, those crazy commercials for the cereal "Just Right" express this fallacy perfect. Something, even God, that is "Just Right" cannot be improved or changed in any way without ceasing to be "Just Right." If God got better, He wouldn’t have been God before; and if God got worse, He would cease to be God. This, plus the many passages which declare the Lord’s immutability pretty well makes hash out of God changing His mind.

# 41—Is God limited?

God is not limited, or finite in any way. If God were limited, how could He be everywhere? (Dt.4:29, Ps.139:7-9, Prov.15:3, Acts 17:27) How could His power be infinite? (Job 42:2, Ps.115:3, Is.43:13, Hab.3:6, Mt.19:26, Mk.14:36, Lk.1:37, Rev.19:6)

Even Jesus who is truly THE Almighty God made flesh (1 Jn.4:1-4) is not limited. Mt. 18:19-20 makes it clear that Jesus can be present in more than one place at one time, since He promises that anytime two or