Search for the Truth DVD: Who Is God?

<videoflash>http://www.veoh.com/videodetails.swf?permalinkId=v341609NkD2psDK&id=1322974&player=videodetails&videoAutoPlay=0%7C540%7C438</videoflash>

This scene is also available on Google Video, MySpace, YouTube, Windows Media, and MPEG-4 (for iTunes/iPod).

[edit] Is God's essential nature physical?

FAIR claims that John 4:24 doesn't preclude God the Father from having a body.^[1]

[edit] Is the doctrine of the Trinity late and non-Biblical?

FAIR claims that "Latter-day Saints do not accept the late, non-biblical Trinitarian creeds."

The Nicene Creed was naturally developed from the content of the Bible. [Deal with Mormon caricatures of the council of Nicea.] Most every bishop brought their Trinitarianism to the council, not merely from it. Very few bishops took the side of the Arians. In any case, both sides were attempting at some level to affirm strict monotheism, which teaches that only one God-being exists. There are plenty examples of early church fathers affirming the central issue (that Jesus himself is God, not simply another god) of the council. Not one--not one--early church father or even known heretic took the position that there was more than one God-being (in the full sense of the term "God" as understood).

FAIR claims that a "plain reading" of the Bible yields a Godhead of three beings, not one. If this is the case, then how does one account for historic Christianity's comprehensive dismissal of this "plain" reading? Not one--not one--early church father read the Bible this way. Rejection of something plain isn't a conclusive argument, but it does serve as part of a larger composite argument. Both the Old and New Testament make it very clear that there is only one God-being. (Provide examples).

[edit] Does Mormonism promote the worship of multiple beings?

FAIR claims that "Latter-day Saints reject any attempt to worship any other being [than the Father?], or assume that any other being has greater power than the God of the Bible."

(How does this square with their worship of Jesus? Mormons seem to be divided over whether he can be directly worshiped, some criticizing McConkie's late doctrinal development (which seems not to accord with historic Mormonism).)

[edit] Was Christ conceived of in a "natural way"?

FAIR claims that there is "no official doctrine on the method by which Christ's mortal body was conceived". This is specifically responding to Phil Robert's comment that the Mormon god "was conceived in a natural way". By calling this into question, they give the impression that there is no official doctrine on whether Christ was "conceived in a natural" way or not. That Christ was conceived in a "natural" way precisely what Brigham Young and other Mormon leaders have taught. This might not fit some modern standards of what constitutes "official" doctrine, but it has nonetheless been authoritatively taught and has never been repudiated.

[edit] Traditional Lorenzo Snow couplet theology

FAIR claims that the King Follet Discourse^[2] is non-canonical. In it, "Joseph Smith simply taught that the Father went through the same process as Christ". Providing no source to support their claims, FAIR claims that

"Jesus Christ has divine status and exaltation by merit and right. By analogy, we presume—but do not know—that the Father proceeded similarly. Exaltation of all other mortals is through the grace, mercy, and atonement of Christ, following the Father's plan."

Even if he did "simply" teach that "the Father went through the same process as Christ", one still has to also account for teachings in the "Sermon in the Grove", as well as the traditional Mormon understanding of Lorenzo Snow couplet theology which was fostered by the teachings of subsequent Mormon prophets and apostles. But Smith did teach more than that. In the discourse Smith taught "you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you".

That, as FAIR claims, the Father "proceeded similarly" and was not exalted by "grace, mercy, and atonement" is not Mormon doctrine by any acceptable definition of what constitutes Mormon "doctrine", nor can it be generalized as a majority Mormon position. The author(s) of this FAIR article is simply touting a non-traditional, minority opinion as though it represents Mormon teaching. Traditional Lorenzo Snow couplet theology, which by all accounts still appears to be the majority position among Mormons who take a position, holds that the mortal probation of the Father was more like ours than Christ's, and that we can model our own experience of exaltation unto godhood after the Father's. We are to learn to become gods as gods like him did before us. In this traditional view Jesus has been seen as the exception, having, unlike the Father, become a god before he experienced a mortal probation. Speaking in accordance with the traditional and majority position, BYU professor Alonzo L. Gaskill writes:

"My opinion is yes, not only is what you suggested [that God the Father sinned] possible, I think we have to believe it probably. For, if we do not assume that, we must assume that we'll never become gods ourselves. Sure, someone like Jesus will become a God and never have sinned, etc. But according to the Church's soteriology, you and I are also seeking to become a god. Thus, Jesus would be the exception. Most deities would be people who lived mortal probations and then became gods through relying upon an atonement of a messiah..."^[3]

[edit] 1 Corinthians 8:4–5

FAIR claims that "Mr. McElveen ignores scriptural context and scholarship in his interpretation [of 1 Corinthians 8:4–5]." FAIR also claims that Origen basically agrees with the LDS interpretation of this passage.

[edit] Isaiah 43:10

FAIR claims that this passage, and those like it, "portray... a contest between Jehovah and the gods of other nations." 43:10 and 44:6,8, they claim should be interpreted in the henotheistic context. The idols in 44:6 are said to simply be "graven images".

[edit] Is deification "a belief common among ancient and modern Christians"?

[edit] Did the serpent lie about becoming a god?

FAIR claims that since God says in Genesis 3:22 that the man is become "as one of us", the serpent only lied about not dying.

[edit] Abraham's lie

According to FAIR, "In the ancient Genesis Apocryphon text, Abraham [when lying] has the same motives described in the Pearl of Great Price as delivered by Joseph Smith... The perspective offered by the Book of Abraham and the Genesis Apocyphon does not contradict the Bible—the Bible simply does not tell us why Abraham and Sarah claimed she was his sister"

FAIR claims that there are Biblical examples "of God commanding deception for the greater good", particularly with Moses

[edit] Notes