Heart of the Matter: When Mormonism Meets Biblical Christianity

Live from the Mecca of Mormonism – Salt Lake City, Utah – This is Heart of the MatterTGNN’s original show where Shawn McCraney deconstructed religion and developed fulfilled theology. – Where Mormonism Meets Biblical Christianity . . . Face to Face Show 6 381 God – part II

And I’m your host, Shawn McCraneyFounder of TGNN and developer of the fulfilled perspective—calling people to faith outside of religion.. We thank the true and living God for allowing us to be part of this, His ministry. May He be with you – and us – tonight.

This is our four hundredth hour-long show. We’ve got a LOT to talk about tonight so let’s get to it.

Keeping Faith and Perspectives

Regarding the MONSON LAW SUIT we are asking John to call in and give us any update he might have? Several weeks ago we reported that Christian apologist Dr. James White went after me and my position on one of his programs. At that time we explained that we were not going to engage in a verbal retaliation with the man who is a brother in Christ. I stated that it is one thing to go after “out of the Body religious institutions” like Mormonism or after an institutional beliefs that are otherwise considered Christian but I was not going to retaliate against Dr. White’s personal attacks on me and my person.

Received this email from Dr. James White.

Shawn:

“A month ago you wrote to us about my reviewing your comments on Calvinism on The Dividing Line. I did review your comments, and wrote to you, twice. But, I have not heard back from you.” “Perhaps I missed your reply? Did you reply? If not, I’m wondering why?”

(STOP – Back to Juan)

Maybe I had a stie in my eye? Or slipped on a banana cream pie? Or was punched by captain blye?

Communication and Debate Dynamics

All kidding aside, let me say something I have found to be a universal truth – so called apologists – Mormon, Christian whatever – share in some very similar characteristics. We have received and read enough emails from them over the years to know. First, there is always this smarmy politeness they all use.

“Good day, sir. Saaaaaay, our ministry here at BLA BLA BLA recently got wind of a comment you made and just wanted some clarification on your stance on something that concerns us . . . . Concerns us . . . We’re really concerned . . . “Concerned.”

Additionally, after a taste of this perfunctory politeness comes the stabbings – which grow in ferocity as the email is long. These veiled attacks of my character are always offset by the promotion of their qualifications. So Dr. James White continues, saying:

“Of course, I did that review assuming you were orthodox in your general theological stance, but I’ve been informed that this is no longer the case. In fact, I was just directed to (y)our recent program wherein you, well, demonstrate you’ve never understood the Christian doctrine of God, sadly.”

And then typically, a little arrogance pops out from between the lines, which is then sublimated by some suggestion or invitation couched in feigned Christian love. Dr. White’s email goes on, saying:

“Given that I have defended the biblical doctrine of the Trinity against Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Muslims, Oneness Pentecostals, etc., I would be happy to find the time to travel up to Utah this year to engage you in public debate on the topic.”

Reflections on Public Debates

Let me respond to Dr. Whites offer to happily travel up to Utah this year to engage me in a public debate by sharing my personal view on stuff like this: The idea of public debates WITHIN the BODY is odd to me. It’s like the eye telling the foot there is no use for it. How come we can’t disagree? Dr. White can challenge my views on Calvinism and God and Hell from his own shows and ministerial outreaches, why the idea of getting together face to face to debate over what we each respectively believe?

If you think it solves something I would suggest not. All public debates typically amount are those who support White saying “He won” and those who support McCraney saying “he won.” It’s all based in a Jerry Springer carnival mentality. I would think minds really change as information is assessed when independently presented – not in a rhetorical boxing ring.

Along these same lines debates (and their supposed victors) do not a truth make. Hitler by and large won most debates in the early years of his establishing the Third Reich – doesn’t mean he was right in his thinking. Dr. White walks about debating this person and that – to what end?

Mastering the Art of Debate

I would suggest that he has mastered the art of the debate, and like the boy with a new hammer, sees the whole world as a nail.

However, all of this being said, I accept my brother’s desire to confront me and my positions in a public forum. I will not debate him, but I will engage in some sort of rational, equal time presentation where he and I can present our views on a topic specified beforehand – and let the audience decide which presentation bears most Godly weight.

The doctor finished his email making some strong assessment – another standard of the apologetic approach, saying:

“Your views of Calvinism are irrelevant, since no one who is not biblical in their view of God would have any basis for understanding the depth of the Gospel that Reformed theology presents. We could find out, very quickly, if your words from your show are true, that is, that we have “mindlessly endorsed a man-made term”?

James

I responded to Dr. White’s challenge, told him that debates are a waste of time but that a forum to present and/or discuss a chosen topic might work. I said I would be available in the Fall. Stay tuned. We’ll let you know the date, place, time, format, and topic of discussion once decided upon.

Examination of Religious Matters

Due to the amount of information I have to give on our second part about “God” (or the Trinity, for that matter) we are going to skip “From the Word” tonight and go right to prayer.

PRAYER PRAYER PRAYER

PRAYER PRAYER PRAYER

In an examination of religious matters our ministry has always looked at what came before the thing being studied, what came during the thing study arrived, and what came after the thought or belief was presented to the world. For example, when looking at Mormonism (say the creation and publication of the Book of Mormon, for instance), we would look at the environment Joseph Smith grew up in (what came before the creation and publication of the BOM), what Smith included in the book itself (what came during the creation and publication of the BOM) and what came after the book was published (changes, advances, etc).

The Doctrine of the Trinity

I will attempt to take this same approach in our look at the doctrine of Trinity.

Ask yourselves something: Do you think the (so-called) Christian doctrine of the Trinity reflects more of the Jewish view of God (which is clearly monotheistic) or that of the Greeks (and other pagan cultures (which were clearly polytheistic)? We all read the same Bible, the same verses, the same context – and clearly from the Judeo Christian biblical perspective, there is only one God, right? So again, do you think the doctrine of Trinity best reflects Judaism, the forerunner to Christianity, or the polytheistic views of paganism?

Many many historians (and Bible scholars too) agree that the Christian idea of Trinity owes far more to Greek philosophy (and its predecessor, pagan polytheism) than to the monotheism of the Jew and the Jewish Jesus. That troubles me because I am a single God only man. One God, true and eternal – no more.

How about you?

4000 years ago the ancient Sumerian culture had their own trinity. And even though Sumeria was overcome by the Assyrians and the Babylonians, their views of a triune god carried on over the ages. A historian named S. H. Hooke describes the Sumerian trinity in his book Babylonian and Assyrian Religion. He says…

Anu was the primary god of heaven, the ‘Father’, and the ‘King of the Gods’; Enlil, the ‘wind-god’ was the god of the earth, and a creator god; and Enki was the god of waters and the ‘lord of wisdom’ (15-18).

Anu, Enlil, and Enki.

This trinity god pushed then into Babylonia (and historian) H. Saggs writes that the Babylonian triad consisted of ‘three gods of roughly equal rank… whose inter-relationship is of the essence of their natures’.

Another author, Alexander Hislop in his book, “The Two Babylons: Or, the Papal Worship," describes the Babylonian triune God, saying ‘In the unity of that one Only God of the Babylonians there were three persons, and to symbolize [sic] that doctrine of the Trinity, they employed… the equilateral triangle, just as it is well known the Romish Church does at this day’

The Egyptian Belief

Looking to Egypt, they believed in a God named Amun. But according to George Hart, lecturer for the British Museum and professor of ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics at the University of London, Amun was really three gods in one.

Ancient Origins of the Trinity Concept

The concept of a trinity in religious traditions has roots that predate the formation of Christianity. In ancient times, a god known as Amun was seen as hidden, with Re as his face and Ptah his body. Historian Will Durant notes that Ra, Amon, and Ptah were combined as three manifestations of a supreme deity. Similarly, a hymn to Amun term these three gods as having no equal, with Amun's name hidden, visible as Re, and embodied as Ptah.

The influence on early Christianity and the Council of Nicaea's adoption of the Trinity concept has been discussed by various scholars. Will Durant in his book "Caesar" suggests that the idea of a divine trinity stems from Egypt. Additionally, Dr. Gordon Laing, a former Dean at the University of Chicago, suggests that the Egyptian triad of Isis, Serapis, and Horus may have shaped early church theologians' views and influenced the Trinity doctrine.

Triunities in Other Cultures

Other examples of early influences on the doctrine of the Trinity include the Etruscans' belief in a triune god consisting of Tinia, Uni, and Menerva, which they brought to Rome. The Romans adopted these ideas, with their own trinity of Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, which became typical in Italy.

Christianity and Pagan Influences

Theologians have debated whether Catholic Christianity incorporated elements like the trinity from other religious traditions. Historian Will Durant claims, "Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it." To support this, Catholic Pope Gregory I advised missionaries not to disrupt traditional beliefs that could be reconciled with Christianity.

Judaism, in contrast, staunchly adhered to monotheism, rejecting pagan polytheism. Passages like, "Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord," emphasize this stance. Judaism’s commitment to monotheism makes it unlikely that the concept of the Trinity originated from it, yet Christianity — born from Jewish tradition — adopted a complex understanding of one God in three persons.

This synthesis raises questions about why the Trinity, a non-biblical and potentially pagan-based concept, became so widely accepted. Some question why God did not provide a clearer explanation of Himself in Trinitarian terms within the scriptures.

Misconceptions and Beliefs

Critics of the Trinity often argue that Jesus was not God, which the text clearly refutes. The author rejects modalism, affirming belief in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit as distinct yet unified aspects of one God. Despite accepting these tenets, the author disputes equating this belief directly to the concept of the Trinity, pointing out differences in understanding and terminology.

The Nature of God

It might be what you (and I) believe. It might be the picture the Bible paints, which is what I thought the Trinity suggested. But I was wrong.

Bottom-line (and we’ll flesh this out in the weeks to come) but bottom line, we have God – He is one. One God. Always only and forever only one God. A monotheist God. He has manifested Himself in all sorts of means and ways to man. He has appeared as fire. Spoken as a still small voice. As clouds, and mist, and wind, and an assortment of other ways. Were they all God? Yes. Manifestations of One God Were they manifestations of more than one God? No.

One monotheistic God. Did this God manifest Himself in spirit? Yes. The second verse in the first chapter of Genesis says:

“And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.”

Hey, listen up – this single monotheistic God also manifested Himself in . . . flesh. That’s all. Not a new second or third “person” of the singular God co equal with the other persons. Just another manifestation of the single God.

Jesus and God

Jesus said it plainly to Philip: “If you have seen me, you’ve seen the father.” The Greek word for see in this passage is Horao and is better understood as Jesus saying: “If you have discerned me, Philip, and not literally seen (which is the Greek word blepo).

That’s all I’m saying. The Spirit – God. One with God. From God, of God, and just God. Jesus – God. One with God. From God, of God – God. Holy Spirit God. The only deal about God being “a or the Father” is in relation to Him having a Son in flesh. He was not a Father until He manifested Himself as the Son.

It’s all really no more complicated than this: “God is one who manifests Himself in a bunch of different ways. If the manifestation is from God, then the manifestation is God, and is sent by the One God to teach us of Him.”

Origins of the Trinity Concept

So where did all this stuff about three persons, co-equal, co-eternal, comprising the one true God come from? Stupid men who want formulae, who love control. In his ministry, Jesus was all over the concept that He was there to do the will of God. He was obviously not co-equal with God while in the flesh – He was in flesh! He didn’t even know the day and hour of His return. How could He be considered co-equal?

God’s fleshly manifestation was to reveal the invisible God. In terms of His relationship with the Father He said, “… I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me,” John 5:30. In John 7:16 He said “my doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me.” Remember what He said in John 14:28? “my Father is greater than I.”

How greater if co-equal? How not co-equal if Jesus is God. Not equal in His becoming flesh. Equal in being a manifestation of God that became flesh. Trinity does not allow for this – unless some real mental gymnastics are allowed. Nowhere in the Bible is the Trinity mentioned. It, like the doctrine it promotes, is MAN-MADE.

If the Trinity did not originate with the Bible, where did it come from? To find the origins of the Trinity in Christianity, we need to take a look at the circumstances in which early Christians found themselves. Very early on in church history, even in the days of the apostles, there was corruption afloat.

Influence of Gnosticism

The Restorationist of Joseph Smith’s day knew this and it’s why they were claiming there needed to be a restoration of all things. Even the Apostle Paul said in his epistle to the Thessalonians that “the mystery of iniquity doth already work.” 2nd Thess 2:7

Throughout his book Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity, the German New Testament scholar, lexicographer, and early Church historian, Walter Bauer, effectively proves that many early Christians were influenced by gnosticism. In his work, “The Greek Fathers,” James Marshall Campbell, a Greek professor, speaks of how prevalent gnosticism was in the early church – so prevalent that many of the apostles writings were to try and dissuade believers from adopting its ways.

What, exactly, did the gnostics believe? Gnosticism borrowed much of its philosophy and religion from Mithraism, oriental mysticism, astrology, magic, and

Influence of Greek Philosophy on Early Christianity

Plato considered matter to be evil and in opposition to Deity, relied heavily on visions, and sought salvation through knowledge. The late Professor Arthur Cushman McGiffert, in his book "A History of Christian Thought," says some of the early Christian fathers saw gnosticism as ‘identical in all intents and purposes with Greek polytheism.’

As with most things, Gnosticism had a mixed influence on the early Christian writers—some were influenced by Gnostic thought and blended elements of it into Christianity, and others swung to the opposite extreme and fought all of it passionately—even the acquisition of knowledge, which was a big part of Gnostic thought. But here’s the deal—thinkers are thinkers—and are typically swayed intellectually by intellectual concepts.

Greek Philosophy’s Impact on Christian Thought

J. N. D. Kelly, lecturer and principal at St. Edward Hall, Oxford University, said that “the concepts of philosophy provided thinkers… with an intellectual framework for expressing their ideas to the extent that it became the ‘deeper religion of most intelligent people.” In other words, Greek philosophy and culture began to factor into the formation of Christian thought.

The philosophical concepts prevalent during the time of the early church were Stoicism, which, according to McGiffert, was ‘ethical in its interests and monistic in its ontology’ and Platonism, which was ‘dualistic and predominantly religious.’ It is a historical fact that these philosophies affected Christianity—at least culturally. But what did these philosophers teach about God?

In Plato’s "Timeus," his “Supreme Reality” is a trinitarian form of the Good, the Intelligence, and the World-Soul. Author Laing attributes elaborate trinitarian theories to the Neoplatonists and considers Neoplatonic ideas as ‘one of the operative factors in the development of Christian theology.’ These factors lend to the thesis that early Christian ideas on the Trinity did in fact descend from Greek philosophy. But just like in our assessment of contributing factors of Joseph Smith’s early years to his construction of the Book of Mormon, they are not proof. Nevertheless, this stuff does help make a case.

The Holy Trinity and Greek Influence

Will Durant tied Greek philosophy to Christianity when he wrote that the second century Alexandrian Church, (from which both Clement and Origen came) ‘wedded Christianity to Greek philosophy’ and that, speaking of the famed pagan Philosopher Plotinus, ‘Christianity accepted nearly every line of him…’ So what happened with the formation of this man-made, non-biblical hogwash called, The Holy Trinity? I’m going to get in deeper next week with details, but again I appeal to Durant who puts it so well, saying: “In Christ and Peter, Christianity was Jewish; in Paul it became half Greek; in Catholicism it became half Roman.”

(beat)

Before we go to the phones let me try and be clear again: Because Mormonism criticizes the construction of Trinity and the influence of Greek philosophy upon it in no way means Smith’s non-biblical concoction was any better. Remember, we are trying to trash the lies, and bring in the truth that allows God to make some biblical sense. In my opinion, related to the make up of God, neither the LDS Godhead nor the Christian trinity accomplishes this.

Let’s open up the phone lines: (801)

And while the operators clear your calls, take a look at the following:

Pondering Divine Justice

1. Why would God create billions of people, knowing beforehand that the vast majority of them would end up burning and screaming forever (trillions upon trillions of years…) in torture and agony in hell? (1 Pet. 1:19-20 tells us God knew mankind would sinMissing the mark of faith and love—no punishment, just lost growth or peace. and would need Jesus to die on the cross, before He even created us.)

2. How can God justify sending billions of people who have never heard the gospel, to hell, when the Bible itself says “How can they believe in Him whom they’ve not heard?” and “How can they hear without a preacher?” (Rom. 10:14) (Rom. 1:18-21 says sinners are without excuse because of the testimony of nature and the conscience God built into them, but then Rom. 10:9-10 says in order to get saved you must believe Jesus was resurrected and say He is Lord with your mouth, which means it is necessary for a person to hear and know the gospel story in order to get saved, as Rom. 10:14 clearly states.)

3. How can God send a nice Chinese man who never heard of Jesus but worked hard to feed his family, committed some sins like the rest of us, and died – to hell to burn forever in agony? Isn’t the punishment way out of proportion with the crime? Why does God’s system of justice seem so different?

The Dilemma of Predestination and Salvation

4. How could God “choose us in Him before the foundation of the world” “according to the good pleasure of His will" (Eph. 1:4-5), knowing that those He didn’t choose will end up burning and screaming forever – how can God just arbitrarily choose who will go to heaven and who will go to hell?

5. Or, for those who take the other side (the “we choose” side) on the predestination dilemma, if this is the all-important age when God is determining who goes to hell and who goes to heaven, why does He allow Satan so much leeway? God can lock up Satan any time, so why does He wait until the next age – when it’s too late? If the stakes are so unfathomably high, why is He allowing such difficult circumstances on earth to seemingly make it as hard as possible for people to get saved?

The Struggle Between Good and Evil

6. If God is trying to advance His Kingdom as much as possible and save as many people as possible during this age, why are we “losing the battle” so badly? Why is Satan getting so many more souls to go to hell than we are able to get to heaven? Again, why would God create humans knowing He would lose so many to endless burning and screaming?

7. Why do so many evil people have so much power, wealth, and influence – and why are we so unsuccessful at replacing their power and influence with our own? In other words, why is God allowing Satan to continue to be the “god of this age” (2 Cor. 4:4) when He told us to “make disciples of all nations”? Why is God allowing us to lose?

8. If our commission for this age is to “make disciples of all nations”, why have ZERO nations been made disciples? Why are we moderately successful at discipling individuals but a total failure at discipling nations (making it so that whole nations obey God's rules of morality)? Why are we failing at God’s mission for us?

The Mystery of Resurrection and Judgment

9. If a Christian goes to heaven consciously immediately when he dies, and is immediately chatting it up with Jesus in heaven and receiving/enjoying his reward, why would that Christian need to be resurrected at the raptureA misinterpreted concept—biblical “rapture” language was fulfilled in 70 A.D., not a future escape event. More? Why did the apostle Paul say in Hebrews 11:35, 39-40 that the dead heroes of faith have not yet received their reward and made great sacrifices in hopes of a "better resurrection" (not a better conscious deathSeparation from God—now overcome. Physical death remains, but it no longer separates us from life with God.), if those dead heroes of faith are already in heaven consciously chatting with Jesus and enjoying their reward? Again, what is the point of the rapture if dead Christians are already consciously chatting with Jesus in heaven and enjoying their reward?

10. If an unsaved person goes to hell immediately when they die, how can God justify giving them this horrible punishment before He gives them their chance to be judged at the white throne judgment? And why would He raise them from the dead to be judged at the white throne judgment merely to say "You've been very bad" and then throw them back in hell? Wouldn't the people already know they'd been bad? What is the point of the white throne judgment if it's merely a "you've been bad" lecture" before throwing the person back in hell? And Is. 45:23 says (quoted by Phill. 2:10-11 and Rom. 14:11) that eventually (the only logical time recorded in Scripture for this to happen would be at the white throne judgment) "every knee will bow and every tongue will swear allegiance to" or "swear by" God. So why would Jesus then immediately turn around and throw billions of people who have just sworn allegiance to Him into hell again?