Teachings of the Mormon Jesus

04 November

The Mormon Jesus

Ensign Article November 2011, “The Teachings of Jesus”

We could sit at our computers all day, every day of the year to write and publish articles and that’d be okay.  However, none of those articles mean anything or can do anything if we don’t have the right understanding of Jesus.

It causes my heart to grieve when I see things like this in the Mormon writings and teachings of their modern day prophets and apostles.  It seems there is no end to the confusion they can cause in the hearts and minds of those who follow after them.  This article I found in the Ensign was written by Dallin Oaks who gave more than a handful of examples of what the Mormons think of Jesus.

The first paragraph in that article is the twofold focus of this one.  It said;

“What think ye of Christ?” (Matthew 22:42). With those words Jesus confounded the Pharisees of His day…”

I find it interesting the Mormon Church disregards the holy words of God by declaring in their 8th Article of Faith “…we believe the Bible is the word of God as far as it is translated correctly”.  Yet we find that they have no problem using the Bible whenever it best suits them.  Mind you, there is no such stipulation upon the extra-biblical writings of their false prophet.

This verse must have been seen worthy enough to use and didn’t go under the poor translation process of those “heretical scholars”.  And it must be easier to justify the use of the heretical scripture when you tell your listeners that you’ll use the scriptures but then use your own extra-biblical writings to interpret God’s holy word.  The Mormon apostle Dallin Oaks went on to say that he wants to talk about Jesus and his teachings but makes a clarification on how he’s going to do that.

Most of my scriptural quotations will come from the Bible because it is familiar to most Christians. My interpretations will of course draw on what modern scripture, notably the Book of Mormon, teaches us about the meaning of Bible scriptures so ambiguous that different Christians disagree on their meaning.

My goodness this is confusing!!!  Why not just use the Bible to interpret the Bible?  What is this all about?  God said He is not the author of confusion so how is the Bible ambiguous?  Where is it ambiguous?

And those questions bring me to the other focus of this article.  Who is Jesus?  Why is the Mormon interpretation and view of Him so vastly different than the rest of Christianity?

“What think ye of Christ”?

We’re going to list part of another article on our site called “What Would Jesus Say” at the end of this (you can also read it in full with the link provided).  It’s a compilation of a handful of facts about Jesus located in the Bible and also what the Mormon Church says about Him.  You can then make your own decision of who is being truthful and who’s being disingenuous.

When I left the Church I heard for the first time in my life that Jesus is God.  I also learned that Jesus wasn’t sexually begotten by God and I learned that Jesus wasn’t married.  While we often have conversations with Mormons that accuse us of lying about these things, I can assure the reader these are indeed the types of things I was taught about Jesus while growing up in Utah Mormonism.

Mormons will only tell you a little of what they believe and their justification in this is that they want you to have the milk before the meat.  Here’s something they won’t tell you:

They believe Jesus is the Only Begotten Son of God in the flesh.

What does the last part of that sentence mean you ask?

It means Jesus is the only son God brought to earth through a sexual union with Mary.  (Mormon Doctrine of Deity, pg. 264, B.H. Roberts)

As always, we don’t do this to bash the Mormon people or to ridicule.  We love and care for them deeply.  We do however know their leaders are leading them astray.  Comments like the ones from Mr. Oaks leave these people in a prison of confusion and self-doubt.   Pray for the Mormons with us won’t you?

With Love in Christ; Michelle

Promised Messiah, pg. 468; “There is no need to spiritualize away the plain meaning of the scriptures. There is nothing figurative or hidden or beyond comprehension in our Lord’s coming into mortality. He is the Son of God in the same sense and way that we are the sons of mortal fathers. It is just that simple.” – Bruce McConkie

Matt. 1:18; Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

Jesus was created spiritually by a Heavenly Father and Mother before coming here to earth.  In Gospel Through the Ages, by Milton Hunter, pg. 21, it says; “Jesus is man’s spiritual brother. We dwelt with Him in the spirit world as members of that large society of eternal intelligences, which included our Heavenly Parents… In that spirit-creation, when we became children of God, Jesus was the “first-born,” and so He is our eldest brother.”

Col. 1:15-7 says; “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.”

Jesus is the firstborn spirit child of God – Encyclopedia of Mormonism, pg. 724; “Jesus Christ, whose main title was Jehovah, was the firstborn spirit child of God the Father and thus the eldest brother and preeminent above all other spirit children of God.”

Phil. 2:7-8 says; “But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.”

Jesus not begotten by the Holy Ghost – Journal of Discourses 1:51 says; “Now remember from this time forth, and for ever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost—”if the Son was begotten by the Holy Ghost, it would be very dangerous to baptize and confirm females, and give the Holy Ghost to them, lest he should beget children…”” – Brigham Young

Luke 1:35 says; “And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”

The Only Begotten according to the flesh…Anytime you see the phrase “after the manner of the flesh” or “according to the flesh” in Mormonism, it is code talk for “through a sexual union”.  From the Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pg. 323 it says; “Jesus Christ is the heir of this Kingdom—the Only Begotten of the Father according to the flesh, and holds the keys over all this world.

Jesus born in Jerusalem – Alma 7:10 says; “And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.”

Matt. 2:1; “Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem.”

Jesus and Lucifer are brothers – James Talmage wrote in Jesus the Christ, pg. 8; “Thus it is shown that prior to the placing of man upon the earth, how long before we do not know, Christ and Satan, together with the hosts of the spirit-children of God, existed as intelligent individuals, possessing power and opportunity to choose the course they would pursue and the leaders whom they would follow and obey.”

John 1:1, 14; “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.”

Jesus is God – The Introductory page of the Book of Mormon says; “Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God”.

Isaiah 9:6; “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Jesus is “a” God – Joseph Fielding Smith said in Doctrines of Salvation 1:32; “Our Savior was a God before he was born into this world, and he brought with him that same status when he came here. He was as much a God when he was born into the world as he was before. But as far as this life is concerned it appears that he had to start just as all other children do and gain his knowledge line upon line.”

John 8:58; “Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

Exodus 3:14; “And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.”

Jesus was the Great High Priest and Adam was next – Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pg. 158; “How have we come at the Priesthood in the last days? It came down, down, in regular succession. Peter, James, and John had it given to them and they gave it to others. Christ is the Great High Priest; Adam next. Paul speaks of the Church coming to an innumerable company of angels—to God the Judge of all—the spirits of just men made perfect; to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant. (Hebrews 12:22-24.)

Hebrews 7:24; “But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.”

Jesus is the Father and the Son – Milton Hunter said in Gospel Through the Ages, pg. 23; “Behold, I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the world to redeem my people. Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son. In me shall all mankind have light, and that eternally, even they who shall believe on my name; and they shall become my sons and daughters.”

Jesus grew into Messiah– Neal A. Maxwell wrote in “Even as I am”, pg. 69; “Elder James E. Talmage asserts authoritatively that the realization that He was, indeed, the Messiah came to Jesus gradually. As a lad, He knew He was the Son of God. Yet as He grew, grace upon grace, and in wisdom and knowledge, there came a point when He knew with fulness who He was and what He had to accomplish. We do not know precisely when that full awareness occurred, but it surely preceded those special days of stress in the wilderness.”

Luke 2:40-2; “And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him. Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover.  And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast.”

Belief in Jesus saves you – Helaman 14:8 says; “And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall believe on the Son of God, the same shall have everlasting life.”

John 3:16; “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

Jesus’ grace and your works saves you – 2 Nephi 25:23 says; “For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.”

Eph. 2:8-9; “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”

Jesus had to obey to receive fullness of the priesthood – Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pg. 308 says; “If a man gets a fullness of the priesthood of God he has to get it in the same way that Jesus Christ obtained it, and that was by keeping all the commandments and obeying all the ordinances of the house of the Lord.”

Jesus was married – Orson Hyde in Journal of Discourses 2:210; “…some of the Eastern papers represent me as a great blasphemer, because I said, in my lecture on Marriage…that Jesus Christ was married at Cana of Galilee, that Mary, Martha, and others were his wives, and that he begat children…they worship a Savior that is too pure and holy to fulfil] the commands of his Father. I worship one that is just pure and holy enough “to fulfil all righteousness;”…Startle not at this! for even the Father himself honored that law by coming down to Mary, without a natural body, and begetting a son; and if Jesus begat children, he only “did that which he had seen his Father do.”

The entire Christian world is wrong about Trinity – Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pg. 311 says; “There is much said about God and the Godhead. The scriptures say there are Gods many and Lords many, but to us there is but one living and true God…The teachers of the day say that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God, and they are all in one body and one God. Jesus prayed that those that the Father had given him out of the world might be made one in them, as they were one [one in spirit, in mind, in purpose]. If I were to testify that the Christian world were wrong on this point, my testimony would be true.

Gal. 1:6-7; “marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.”

Jesus Christ and Joseph Smith are related – From the book “Jesus Was Married”, pg. 94, by Ogden Kraut it says; “Since Joseph Smith did hold the keys of the kingdom in the last days, (D&C 65:2, 115:19) and was the “Rod” from the loins of the Stem of Jesse, he would have the blood of Abraham, Jesse, and the Savior, according to the testimony of scripture and revelation.  It would be evident that Joseph Smith should also know these facts.  The Prophet did understand them—and more—but he was reluctant to tell them because of the traditions and ideologies of modern Christianity.”

Jesus’ lineage can be found in the books of Matthew and Luke; neither of these books says anything about Joseph Smith being in the lineage of Jesus Christ.

Jesus paid for man’s sin in the Garden of Gethsemane – Jesus the Christ, pg. 568 says; “… the Savior took upon Himself the burden of the sins of mankind from Adam to the end of the world…In March 1830, the glorified Lord, Jesus Christ, thus spake: “For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent, but if they would not repent, they must suffer even as I, which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore…and I partook and finished my preparations unto the children of men.”” – James Talmage

The Garden of Gethsemane doesn’t qualify as the place for the atonement of Christ.  First of all there are numerous verses in the Old Testament which prophecy about the atonement that would eventually be made at the cross – Isaiah 53 is just one example.  Secondly, there is what God said in Lev. 17:11; “For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.”

Jesus and the Cross – Joseph Fielding Smith said in Doctrines of Salvation 1:130; “A great many people have an idea that when he was on the cross, and nails were driven into his hands and feet, that was his great suffering. His great suffering was before he ever was placed upon the cross. It was in the Garden of Gethsemane that the blood oozed from the pores of his body.”

1 Cor. 1:18; “For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.”

Jesus’ blood can’t atone for all sins – There are three sins that Jesus cannot forgive –


D&C 42:79; “And it shall come to pass, that if any persons among you shall kill they shall be delivered up and dealt with according to the laws of the land; for remember that he hath no forgiveness; and it shall be proved according to the laws of the land.”


D&C 85:11; “And they who are of the High Priesthood, whose names are not found written in the book of the law, or that are found to have apostatized, or to have been cut off from the church, as well as the lesser priesthood, or the members, in that day shall not find an inheritance among the saints of the Most High.”

Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost-

D&C 132:27; “The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which shall not be forgiven in the world nor out of the world, is in that ye commit murder wherein ye shed innocent blood, and assent unto my death, after ye have received my new and everlasting covenant, saith the Lord God; and he that abideth not this law can in nowise enter into my glory, but shall be damned, saith the Lord.”

This standard would eliminate King David and the Apostle Paul from salvation.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

13 Responses to “Teachings of the Mormon Jesus”

  1. jeremy November 5, 2011 at 12:24 am #

    People, It is easy to take anything out of context. Honestly, If you want to know about the mormons, ask the mormons. Many of the people that write these types of articles didn’t simply “leave the church,” many are members who were offended by people, or excommunicated for not living the teachings of the church whether it be through sexual sin, drug addiction, spousal abuse, or any number of serious sins. If you want to know if something is true study it out in your mind and heart, compare the teachings of the church, the book of mormon, and the bible IN FULL CONTEXT, and remember that satan would have us fight eachother about religion. The antagonistic, sarcastic, and angry overtones of this article should clearly highlight the character of the writer. Remember how Christ taught. Even in the face of non-believers, and people who literally wanted to cause him bodily harm he showed love and patience. Christ didn’t waste his time attacking others beliefs, he simply taught and lived his teachings. Christ invited people to come to him. Remember that when reading sarcastic, antagonistic articles like this.

    • lifeafterministry November 5, 2011 at 12:32 am #

      You’ve obviously not read our statement of faith, nor any of the testimonies or the hundreds of articles we’ve posted on this site. If you had you wouldn’t have made the comment you did and for that we’re sad for you. Perhaps you’ll take the time to go back and see that while we do disagree with the Church we are more than thrilled with finding Jesus in spite of the lies of the Church.
      Know that we’re praying for you.
      With Love in Christ, Michelle

    • lifeafterministry November 5, 2011 at 8:42 pm #

      Jeremy, Why is it anytime, anyone leaves the Mormon Church it had to be because they were “offended” or there was some “serious sin”? Neither was the case for why I left the church, yet Mormons are compelled to believe the same lie you do. I think when you get right down to it the truth is you’re afraid, you’re afraid to give any acknowledgment to the real reasons people give for leaving.

      You can keep telling yourself people only leave the church because they were offended or because of a sin they couldn’t deal with, or you can read the testimonies of people who have left for a real relationship with Jesus Christ. – Melissa Grimes

  2. Timothy Berman November 5, 2011 at 9:24 pm #

    Actually, your article is based on several logical fallacies. First, recent Scholarship into the Biblical Text proves the 8th Article of Faith. Go to a reputable college that deals with the Bible and one will learn the textual criticism. Many evangelical Christians condemn Mormonism for their forthright observation that the Bible as we have it today is far from perfect as a text. Look up Long Ending of Mark. References in Jude to the Book of Enoch, and the First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians that was considered scripture until the official Canon of the Bible. In fact, study the history of the Canon and you will find that the early Christians and Church Fathers disputed as to what was and was not considered part of the canon. The original canon had approximately 80 books, not 66 books. Furthermore, with the discovery of the Dead sea scrolls and Ugaritic text, there is further light shed on the change of the original passages, like Deuteronomy 32:8-9 where it is discovered that it originally read that the nations were divided by the number of the Sons of God and not by the number of the Children of Israel. If you can, get a copy of Mark E. Petersen’s book As Translated Correctly and you will discover that when the English Bible as translated and sent out, there were various versions between the Catholic and Protestant where the texts had been changed to suit doctrinal persuasions. So, if you are going to argue, do not argue from the standard Anti-Mormon Rhetoric that will show you to be foolish when compared to actual academic and scholarly research.

    Second, it is the modern Christian Jesus that is anethema to the Biblical Christ. John 17, Resurrection accounts, Revelation 3:21. How many times did Christ refer to himself separate from the Father? Several occasions. Furthermore, the Nicene Council was actually convened by a Pagan Sun Worshiper who wanted to unite a divided Roman Empire. Therefore, study actual history and then come back to the table and discuss these. Otherwise, your article here is nothing more than regurgitated Anti-Mormon sentiment that has adequately been disproven on numerous occasions and your criticism is fallacious.

    • lifeafterministry November 5, 2011 at 11:19 pm #

      Two real quick things here for you to look at and pray about Timothy.
      You’ve just called Jesus a liar – twice. He told us that the gates of hell would not prevail against His church so the idea that modern research has validated your 8th article of faith would be anathema to the body of Christ is a false teaching and heretical. See Matthew 16:18 and study what the experts say about the Dead Sea Scrolls.
      The other statement you made about the Bible itself is blatantly false according to Jesus. He told us in 24:35 that the word of God endures forever. He said that heaven and earth would pass away but not his word. Jesus looked upon the word as a perfect reflection of our perfect God.
      I pray you’ll study, evaluate and go to God to ask Him to reveal the truth to you.
      With Love in Christ; Michelle

    • lifeafterministry November 6, 2011 at 1:20 am #

      Number 1. This is your last warning. You can disagree with me all you want and that’s okay. It’s America, God has given you that right.
      When you come onto this site and start calling names you will be cut off from participation Mr. Berman.
      The rude attitude proves my point that I am forever telling my readers. Your choice of words in expressing yourself is less than admirable and goes to show your anger is covering up something hidden deep in your heart.
      2. We have this site because of the attacks against Christianity that Joseph Smith came out with in his “work” against God. My reference to Matthew 16:18 is not speaking of a corporation like LDS, Inc., rather it is the collective body of Christ.
      3. I have a question for you personally to ponder. Why do you carry around that torrid Bible, quote from it and promote its message when in fact you hate it, don’t trust it and all but stomp on it?
      4. Your argument is overlooked when such rude behavior is exhibited, know that we’re praying for you.
      Michelle Grim, Life After Ministries

  3. Timothy Berman November 6, 2011 at 12:50 am #

    Michelle, since your site claims to rely on “Facts” here are facts that prove my case and disprove your position.

    Gates of Hell. First, Matthew 16:18 is grossly misinterpreted. Nowhere in the text is Christ talking about an organization. Secondly, the context does not allow it. The context of Matthew 16:18 is where Christ asks – who do men say that I am, and then subsequently, who do the disciples say that Christ is. Peter gives his confession that Christ is the Son of the Living God. In response to this, Christ responds that knowledge did not reveal this, teachings of men did not reveal this, nor did anything except for the Father who is in Heaven by the power and authority of the Spirit. In light of this, Christ stated that it was upon this rock – the Revelation that Jesus is the Christ is what HIS Church would be built upon. As pertaining to the Gates of Hell, in Greek, Hell in Matthew 16:18 is actually Hades and Hades is the abode of the Dead. What Christ was actually saying here is that the abode of the dead (which is the grave) would not prevail against Him. Ancient Cities were surrounded by a wall – the City of Jerusalem had three walls surrounding it. There is a main gate that when the city is under seige by an army, the gate is closed. Prevailing against the Gate meant to break through the fortress and gain access. What is the Gate to the Grave? Death is the gateway to the Grave. So what Christ is stating is that Death and the Grave would not prevail against him at all because he proved this true when he rose on the third day from the Grave, having therefore conquered Sin and Death. There is no other interpretation of this and the foundation that Christ’s church would be built upon is the revelation that Jesus is the Christ, Son of the Living God as divinely inspired.

    Next, as pertaining to scholarship on the Translation of the Bible here are some links to information pertaining to what I am talking about:

    1) The Long Ending of Mark:

    a – The Westminster Study Edition of the Holy Bible (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1948).

    vv. 9-20. This section is a later addition; the original ending of Mark appears to have been lost. The best and oldest manuscripts of Mark end with ch. 16:8. Two endings were added very early. The shorter reads: “But they reported briefly to those with Peter all that had been commanded them. And afterward Jesus himself sent out through them from the East even to the West the sacred and incorruptible message of eternal salvation.” The longer addition appears in English Bibles; its origin is uncertain; a medieval source ascribes it to an elder Ariston (Aristion), perhaps the man whom Papias (c. A.D. 135) calls a disciple of the Lord. It is drawn for the most part from Luke, chapter 24, and from John, chapter 20; there is a possibility that verse 15 may come from Matthew 28:18-20. It is believed that the original ending must have contained an account of the risen Christ’s meeting with the disciples in Galilee (chs. 14:28; 16:7).

    b – A Commentary on the Holy Bible, edited by J.R. Dummelow (New York: MacMillan, 1927), pages 732-33.

    9-20. Conclusion of the Gospel. One uncial manuscript gives a second termination to the Gospel as follows: ‘And they reported all the things that had been commanded them briefly (or immediately) to the companions of Peter. And after this Jesus himself also sent forth by them from the East even unto the West the holy and incorruptible preaching of eternal salvation.’

    Internal evidence points definitely to the conclusion that the last twelve verses are not by St. Mark. For, (1) the true conclusion certainly contained a Galilean appearance (Mark 16:7, cp. 14:28), and this does not. (2) The style is that of a bare catalogue of facts, and quite unlike St. Mark’s usual wealth of graphic detail. (3) The section contains numerous words and expressions never used by St. Mark. (4) Mark 16:9 makes an abrupt fresh start, and is not continuous with the preceding narrative. (5) Mary Magdalene is spoken of (16:9) as if she had not been mentioned before, although she has just been alluded to twice (15:47, 16:1). (6) The section seems to represent not a primary tradition, such as Peter’s, but quite a secondary one, and in particular to be dependent upon the conclusion of St. Matthew, and upon Luke 24:23f.

    On the other hand, the section is no casual or unauthorised addition to the Gospel. From the second century onwards, in nearly all manuscripts, versions, and other authorities, it forms an integral part of the Gospel, and it can be shown to have existed, if not in the apostolic, at least in the sub-apostolic age. A certain amount of evidence against it there is (though very little can be shown to be independent of Eusebius the Church historian, 265-340 A.D.), but certainly not enough to justify its rejection, were it not that internal evidence clearly demonstrates that it cannot have proceeded from the hand of St. Mark.

    Now, those are simply two references to the dispute over the Short and Long ending of the Gospel of Mark in the 16th Chapter.

    2 – Protestant and Roman Catholic competition with an English Translation of the Bible:

    a- Introduction to the Catholic Edition of the Revised Standard Version 1965:

    “For four hundred years, following the great upheaval of the Reformation, Catholics and Protestants have gone their separate ways and suspected each other’s translations of the Bible of having been in some way manipulated in the interests of doctrinal pre-suppositions. IT MUST BE ADMITTED THAT THESE SUSPICIONS WERE NOT ALWAYS WITHOUT FOUNDATION.”

    b – Tyndale Bible appeared in 1525 and was influenced by Tyndales views. Similarily, Matthews Bible of 1537 and the Taveners Version in 1539 were produced by the influence of their respective views as well.

    c – Church of England came out with the Cranmer Bible in 1539, and then the Bishops Bible of 1568.

    d – Douay Rheims/Vulgate version was produced by the Roman Catholic Church, appearing in 1582 and came as pressure from the Roman Catholic parishoners wanting to have their own Bible just as the Protestants had their own. This version was prepared with Catholics in mind and one such change of passage of scripture was that where it says “Do penance, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand”, instead of how it is rendered in the text today.

    e – Dr. J. P. Arendzen was commissioned by the Roman Catholic Hierarchy of Great Britain to produce his 1947 revision of the Douay Bible because, as he states in his preface, that this work was undertaken because the 1582 version CARRIED TOO MUCH of the Reformation “flavor) and that a version to keep with modern thought was much needed.

    Again, Michelle, LAM claims to base their information on facts, these are just some of the Facts that support the case that the Bible is God’s word as far as it is translated correctly in light of modern Textual Criticism and recent scholarly and academic research in the Biblical field.

    3 – Documentary Hypothesis of the Pentatuech

    What many evangelical Christians do not know about is that there is a model of the first five books of the Old Testament. This model is called the Documentary Hypothesis or the J, D, E, P documentary evidence. J refers to the Jawist, D is for the Deuteronomist, E is the Eloist, and P is referring to the Priestly documents. The basis for this premise is that there are varying degrees of literary composition that make up all five books of the Old Testament. Meaning, there are five distinct literary styles prevalent in todays Bible translations. This is attested to how some of the stories are told. For instance, the story of Noah and the building of the Ark. First, Genesis records that the Lord commanded Noah to take 7 of EACH Animal into the Ark. Later in the same chapter, we read that Noah did as the Lord commanded and took 2 of every animal – male and female. Two different stories, with two different number of animals. Here is a link that gives a brief description of what this model refers to and what it means and why it is important to understand: http://imp.lss.wisc.edu/~rltroxel/Intro/hypoth

    4 – The people of Canaan would not be able to withstand Joshua and the Israelite Army and they would drive out the people with ease.

    This is listed as one of the “failed prophecies” of the Bible. That is right, a prophecy that did not come to pass as YHWH himself is recorded to have said. The passage in question here is Joshua 1:3-5:

    ” 3 Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses.

    4 From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and unto the great sea toward the going down of the sun, shall be your coast.

    5 There shall not any man be able to stand before thee all the days of thy life: as I was with Moses, so I will be with thee: I will not fail thee, nor forsake thee.”

    Joshua confirms this in Joshua 3:10 by telling the Israelites that they will not fail and God will give the entire land to them and no one will be able to withstand them.

    It is when we get to Joshua 15:63 that we find the Jebusites remained in the land of Canaan, as well as the Jebusites being able to withstand Joshua and the imposing Hebrew Army. Check it out and compare it for yourself – if YHWH stated that NO ONE would withstand Joshua and the Hebrews and yet the Jebusites were able to? What happened?

    There are plenty of other references, like Deuteronomy 32:8-9, and if you don’t believe the change in that one, then here are some statements to it are contained in Michael Heiser’s “The Divine Council” (http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/DT32BibSac.pdf) and in the book Triumph of Elohim, from Yawhism to Judaisms; and The Great Angel: A Study of Israel’s Second God. Michael Smith also wrote a book on this as well titled The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel (San Francisco/New York: Harper & Row, 1990; second paperback edition, The Biblical Resource Series, Grand Rapids, MI/Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans; Dearborn, MI: Dove Booksellers, 2002). And his link here is: http://www.hebrewjudaic.as.nyu.edu/object/marksmith.html

    Therefore, Michelle, I am not calling Christ a liar (as you have presumptiously spoke of in false accusation), I am calling you and LAM a Liar because you claim to base your information on Facts. Well, here are the facts that just disproved you and you can verify those “Facts” for yourself, or any of your readers. And, as you can see, I have done my homework and I have studied and the information that I have is based on true, real, academic and scholarly facts. Yours, is based on consistent Anti-Mormon Argumentation and Rhetoric that has no basis in Facts.

  4. Timothy Berman November 6, 2011 at 2:05 am #


    Number 1. This is your last warning. You can disagree with me all you want and that’s okay. It’s America, God has given you that right.

    My response:

    I have not been given prior warnings so how can this by my last warning? I agree, if one agrees or not agree with something, it is a choice. However, the question is begged, what is the foundation for that agreement or disagreement? My disagreement has a premise and basis that is factual and ought to be considered in respect to the discussion.

    When you come onto this site and start calling names you will be cut off from participation Mr. Berman.

    My response:

    I am sorry, where have I called someone names? If you are referring to me saying that you and LAM are liars, based on the evidence presented is because of my response to you and your insinuation that I am calling Christ a liar. Therefore, your statement is included within the criticism and appropriately placed. I am not name calling, I am pointing out the severity of claiming that you present facts when those facts are not facts at all and are easily disproven.


    The rude attitude proves my point that I am forever telling my readers. Your choice of words in expressing yourself is less than admirable and goes to show your anger is covering up something hidden deep in your heart.
    2. We have this site because of the attacks against Christianity that Joseph Smith came out with in his “work” against God. My reference to Matthew 16:18 is not speaking of a corporation like LDS, Inc., rather it is the collective body of Christ.

    My response:

    Here is where, again, I challenge your criticism and point to how it is not founded on facts or logical reasoning. Where is my attitude rude? Pointing out that the arguments employed in the article and built on being fallacious? Logical Fallacy is a “FACTUAL” mechanic to determine if someone is engaging in proper discussion or not. At the outset of your article, you employ two logical fallacies – one is poisoning the well and the second is known as a red herring. Your comments further prove the point that you rely on logical fallacies and refuse to actually engage in the conversation at hand itself. Notice the difference, I ask you to point out where I am being rude or offensive since you are making the claim. I am pointing out that your claims are based on logical fallacies. The difference is I am being objective and unemotive in my response and you are being emotive in your spot because it tells me that you personally cannot reason on an intellectual level when facts and evidences truly does disprove your case. It has nothing to do with whether or not one is being rude or belligerent or having an attitude, it goes to show that there is an adequate response that you are personally refusing to engage in and discussing. In short, I am not the one throwing the attitude or going off the handle. It is the one pointing the fingers of accusation when in reality there are three others pointing right back to that said individual.

    Michelle Says:

    3. I have a question for you personally to ponder. Why do you carry around that torrid Bible, quote from it and promote its message when in fact you hate it, don’t trust it and all but stomp on it?

    My response:

    And here is where your emotions get the best of you and your logical fallacy comes full force in rearing its ravenous head. You presume that I hate the Bible because you believe and insinuate that I hate the Bible. I, in reality, do not hate the Bible, nor do I despise the Bible as you have falsely accused me of doing. I teach from the Bible, study from the Bible, and understand the Bible as much as I possibly can. I have spent many years reading and studying much of the text, as well as the history, and even the archaeological evidence pertaining to the Bible. I understand the history behind how we have the English Translation of the Bible. I understand passages of the Bible and utilize many well known Bible Commentaries that help explain some of the texts.

    However, you would not know that because you have placed yourself in the seat of judgment and condemned me prior to actually engaging in an honest and forthright discussion as to what I do and do not know about the Bible.

    Again, your premise is not based on facts, but an emotive reaction to the reality that your premise has been challenged and adequately shown to be faulty. I come from a purely academic perspective, why can’t you do the same?


    4. Your argument is overlooked when such rude behavior is exhibited, know that we’re praying for you.
    Michelle Grim, Life After Ministries

    My Response:

    And that is the most dangerous position, as well as a logical fallacy, to conclude. The one that is being rude and exhibiting “childish” and unintelligable anger is the one making the false accusations my friend. Now, you could have actually engaged in the conversation of my second commentary to where I provided substantial evidence (which is barely a drop in the bucket mind you) and discuss things in a more calm and rational manner, however, it is you who have chosen to go off the handle in a ranting tirade of pointing your finger at me and making more false claims and then state that my arguments can’t be taken serious.

    Let me ask you a question, would you take an adult who is calm, respectful, and engages in an honest dialogue with someone over another adult who stomps their feet, cries out “your wrong your wrong your attitude stinks and your pathetic, and an idiot and no one will take you seriously”? I prefer someone who engages in a conversation that is healthy, respecful and honest, even if we both come away still disagreeing from one another than having a conversation with someone who gets emotional and flies into a ranging temper tantrum when they ought to contain their anger and actually employ some self-control.

    The fact you can’t answer my questions and my responses shows that you truly do not care about the real facts and evidence since you are so wrapped up in your own delusions, and your verbal temper tantrum here just further proves the point. Some advice, put aside the angry montage of verbal assualts and actually engage in the conversation so that you don’t look like a child throwing a temper tantrum in the candy store.

    • lifeafterministry November 6, 2011 at 2:39 am #

      The rules for commenting are on the front page of the site. It’s fairly simple to see – there’s nothing hidden. I can’t help it if Smith attacked the body of Christ. You can help it though when you call people liars. If you don’t like the rules of this blog there are others out there to participate with/in.
      Don’t come on here and call names. It’s fairly easy to read those rules and understand them.

  5. CamdenC November 8, 2011 at 3:01 am #

    The grass withers and the flower fades, but the Word of our God stands forever.

  6. CamdenC November 8, 2011 at 4:51 am #


    While I can see that you are very learned, though your knowledge of the Bible pales in comparison to the Omniscience and Omnipotence of Jesus the Christ.

    “All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made” and He is “the Word that was made flesh and dwelt among us”. He is “the Word”.

    Do you believe that the One who created everything by the Word of His mouth, would allow His Word to be corrupted or changed? He has the Ominipotence to insure that all people would have His Gospel of salvation by Grace through Faith, in it’s purest form.

    To say that “many precious things pertaining to the gospel” were lost through translation, carelessness, or outright deception is to have the attitude or view of a Deist. They beleive that God “wound the clock” then just sat back and watched.

    Do you believe that Jesus did all that He did (left fellowship with the Father and Holy Spirit, emptied Himself of His God attributes, suffered the scourging and beating, spit on, beard pulled out, crown of thorns, then was nailed to the cross, was seperated completely from His Father by our sins, and died of a broken heart) only to sit back and (according to the LDS church) watch sinful men and apostate Christians corrupt His Word and His Gospel?

    It sounds, to me, that Joseph’s claim that the Gospel had to be restored is arrogant and fallible.

    God wants everyone to be saved, through faith in Jesus Christ (John 3:16 / 14:6). What Joseph Smith basically said was that the world had been in the dark for 1,800 years. How many people during that time put their faith in the Jesus of the Bible only to (according to LDS teachings) find out they had been following a “myth” and the churches they had been attending were “nothing less than the whore of Babylon”.

    According to your church teachings, one has to be a member of the LDS church, be baptized in that church, profess Joseph Smith as a true prophet of God, trace ancestors and get them baptized by proxy, follow the word of wisdom, be LDS temple worthy, pay tithing to the LDS church, and on and on… How many millions and millions of people were lost since the 1st century???

    I know you will probably come back with the whole spirit prison thing and having a chance to accept the LDS version of salvation in the afterlife… how do you account for Hebrews 9:27?

  7. Dave Barto November 22, 2011 at 2:25 pm #

    Timothy, I believe if you get Jesus Christ wrong, you are certainly not a Christian or a full, complete believer of Him. The real question here Timothy is Jesus God or not? Biblically speaking He is..Why did your Mormon apostle remove, John 1:1 and used John 1:2-3? Jesus is our God..He’s God in flesh..Mormons don’t believe this that’s why in 2 John 1:7
    [ Beware of Antichrist Deceivers ] For many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.and .1 John 4:3
    and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is …If you don’t believe that Jesus is God in flesh, I believe that scripture certainly reveals something. Don’t you?

  8. thegardensofboxwoodmanor July 20, 2012 at 12:56 am #

    Reblogged this on Compendum of Christian Blogs.

Leave a Reply