Ontology of God, Part 7

Live from Salt Lake City, Utah

This is Heart of the MatterTGNN’s original show where Shawn McCraney deconstructed religion and developed fulfilled theology., where we do all we can to try and worship God in Spirit and in Truth. I’m your host, Shawn McCraneyFounder of TGNN and developer of the fulfilled perspective—calling people to faith outside of religion..

Show 50 476 Ontology of God Part VII

December 15th 2015
Our prayer tonight will be given by ______________

This past week I had the honor to be a guest on Bishop Earl’s interview program produced by Main Street Church in Brigham City. We had a really nice time together and I want to thank the grace extended to me by Pastor Jim Caitlin and Scott and the staff – including, of course, the Erskines. The three-part interview series will be available on January 13th for part I, January 20th for part II, and January 27th for part III.

Where I know Pastor Jim and Earl do not agree with me on a number of points of doctrine I was treated with love and respect by them and in my experience that is a rarity in Evangelical Christianity. Also – mark your calendars – beginning January 5th, 2016 – right before Heart of the Matter at 7:30 MTN time this ministry is launching a new show called, Breaking Bread with Warren Puckett. And with that how about a moment from the Word.

From the Word

From the Word – 2nd John 2

2nd John 1:3
“Grace be with you, mercy, and peace, from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love.”

From The Word – Jude

Jude 1:17-21
“But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit. But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost, keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.”

Before we continue on with our topic for tonight I want to touch on the subject of Truth and Hope. Paul wrote in the last verse of 1st Corinthians 13:

1 Corinthians 13:13
“And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.”

I use this verse to show the importance of hope – it’s one of Paul’s big three. It is said by some that by itself Christians can be identified by their hope, just as we can be identified by our faith alone and by our love alone. But the Christian possesses all three. I’d love to go in and explain the difference between faith and hope but due to lack of time and another objective we’ll leave that to another day.

Christian Hope might be best defined as expectation. The Greek is elpece – expectation. Of what? I believe an expectation in the fulfilled promises and teachings of God. I mention all this because Hope is a very important principle of Christianity. But it must be properly placed. It’s important that a believer's hope is stoked as a means to strengthen faith (as a means to increase love) but misplaced, and displaced, and false hopes are unfortunately part of the modern Christian way.

False Hopes in Christianity

What takes precedence hope or truth? They work together. We want truth as a means to know where to place our hope. Religion often promotes what some believe are great “Christian hopes” when in reality they only engender bad faith and false hopes. We see these false hopes perpetrated in eschatologyStudy of “last things”—TGNN teaches all biblical eschatology was fulfilled in 70 A.D. More, faith healings, promises of prosperity, and imaginary descriptions of things God never admits. We see them in books from people who claim to have returned from the dead, who have gone to heaven, or have done to hell, and have come back to tell us what to expect. We find them in promises of eternal families, tithe paying, and rewards for complicity toward men. But in the end all of our hope relates to God through His Son Jesus Christ. Our hope is upon Him and Him alone – not what men promise He will do. Just on who He is. Something to think about.

All right…

We have been talking about the make-up of God over the past number of shows and essentially have concluded that the LDS views of God and the Godhead have “morphed over time” and have gone from a pretty traditional stance to a henotheistic polytheistic view that states that God is not one body with three heads.

Understanding the Nature of God

Old school caricature of Trinitarianism but instead says that God is three persons with three separate bodies (of some form or another).

At the same time Christians primarily see God as a Trinity while others understand God’s make-up in some shape of Modalism or in a Unitarian make-up (which typically excludes Jesus from being God). When majority rule agrees on one view the fallout can be extreme when it is challenged, but I hope all within the sound of my voice have the ability to see that not one of us have a perfect understanding of the make-up of God and this fact alone suggests a retreat from dogma, and division, and name-calling.

I personally disagree with what the LDS presently say about God – but if there a person has embraced their teachings while at the same time seeking God humbly in my estimation they are as right or as wrong as some of the views believers in Christianity maintain. Again, are we saved by knowledge or by faith? Are we weighed by God for our knowledge or our love for Him and others?

Tonight we are going to push into the Nature of God more specifically and talk about God whom we call the Father.

Christian Perspectives on God the Father

Of course Trinitarians say that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are co-equal, co-eternal, uncreated individual persons who make up the one God. In this, the Father has a role that He takes as lead, but this is a thumbnail on the way they see the Father. I personally see Father as synonymous with God. There is one God. There has always and only been One God. I don’t see Him as a Father until the birth of His Son the Word made flesh. In any case, I think we all see through a glass darkly and everyone who seeks Him in Spirit and Truth has something to bring to mix and all have the right to understand Him as lead. The Spirit will lead all of us closer and closer to the truth and so there is no need to freak out over what individuals see and believe and perceive.

LDS Views and Changes Over Time

That being said let’s talk about the Christian views of God the Father and then present the LDS and how they have changed over time to the present. For starters, the LDS currently maintain a view of God the Father that is utterly rejected by Bible reading Christians. The Father’s name is Elohim, He is literally the Father of all spirits, and was Himself once a man who passed through a progression of being human like all human beings today. From the modern Christian perspective, who sees God in absolute terms (instead of finite terms) this perspective is preposterous – even blasphemous.

It appears – again, it appears, that the God of the Old Testament subtly reveals Himself over the course of the narrative. For example, it seems that the early Old Testament writers described God as possessing some attributes that appear more human like than God-like. For example, Moses wrote (and again these are the words Moses choose to explain what the Spirit was saying to Him) but in Genesis 6:6-7 Moses wrote:

6:6-7 “And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.”

We talked last week about how God in II Kings asked the angels for their input on a matter (which is a very administrative democratic way in viewing the heavenly host) and we even read in Job 1:7)

1:7 “And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.”

I personally see God in these instances as the Loving God that He is, like a kindly patriarch seeking to engage with and communicate with His creations. I may know the answer when I ask my grandboys, “what do you think the best way is to get the lawnmower to the repair man," but it doesn’t preclude me from asking. But when the Old Testament describes Him as being sorry for decisions He has made we have to admit that God does not SEEM – SEEM, DOLLY, SEEM – as absolute as we speak of Him today. That being said, books

The Nature of God in Scripture

In examining the scriptures written later in the history of the Old Testament, God is described in more absolute terms.

Psalm 90:2 says:
“Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.”

Psalm 93:2 says of Him:
“Thy throne is established of old: thou art from everlasting.”

Malachi 3:6 says, “For I am the LORD, I change not.”

Jeremiah 32:17 says:
“Ah Lord GOD! behold, thou hast made the heaven and the earth by thy great power and stretched out arm, and there is nothing too hard for thee.”

From Deuteronomy 6:5 we learn that God “is one,” and in Isaiah 44:24 God says plainly:
“Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself.”

One God in Different Faiths

Central to all of Judaism, all of Islam, and all of Christianity is one God – with some twists and variations on the one God tossed in along the way. We have pointed out that throughout the New Testament epistles that God is most frequently honored and mentioned separately from the Son.

For instance, in our weekly verse by verseTGNN’s Bible teaching series—book-by-book, through the lens of fulfillment and spiritual liberty. study we are in Acts 4 where Peter and John are put on trial for healing a man born lame. Not being able to convict them they are let free and the two returned to the company of other believers. Let’s read what Luke’s account says.

23 And being let go, they (Peter and John) went to their own company (other believers), and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said unto them. 24 And when they (the other believers) heard that, they lifted up their voice to God (nothing about the Son here, but this is speaking of them lifting up their voices to the One God) with one accord, and said, “Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is: 25 Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? 26 The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. (did you catch it? They were speaking to God and how enemies were against Him AND against His Christ (and/or His – God’s – anointed) 27 For of a truth against thy (God’s) holy child Jesus, whom thou (God) hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, 28 For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.”

God the Father and Jesus the Son

From this single example, one I took straight out of our current study of Acts, we can clearly see that the earliest believers and followers of Jesus related to God, His (and now their) Father. This is also why almost every New Testament letter begins with a line that says something like: “Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.” It’s why Jesus made His ministry and mission absolutely clear – all people come to God the Father by faith on Him, the Lord and Savior, who saved and redeemed us from sinMissing the mark of faith and love—no punishment, just lost growth or peace..

After last week's show on the Plural pronouns of the Old Testament, we received the following email from brother Burt S saying:

“Shawn, I thoroughly enjoy your shows, and for the most part agree with you. I converted to Mormonism in 1958. Later, I attended and graduated from BYU. Today I am inactive in the Church. I concur with your interpretation of the 4 verses quoted in last week's episode (#475). That said, how do you explain John 17 verses 20-26?

Here, Jesus, praying to His father, employs a subject-object distinction. He uses the pronouns “I” and “me” referring to Himself, and the second person pronouns, “thou” and “thee” when he addresses God.

When He speaks of His relationship with the father, he uses “we”. Clearly, this passage demonstrates that the father and the son are two different persons. Does it not? I would appreciate your answer to this.

Burt

I will put it this way:

When God had His Words become flesh, a human, He became

God the Father and Early Mormon Views

The father of the human being, even Jesus, who was a man, a different person. And Jesus, completely man, related and submitted to His Father the way a child relates and submits to an earthly father. But within Him – His Spirit – He was God and it is why Jesus was able to say in John 10:30:

“I and my Father are one.”

Jesus flesh was certainly not one with the Father. But within Him, by the Spirit, He and the Father were completely one, even one God. But relative to our topic tonight I’m getting ahead of myself. Let’s continue talking about God the Father.

At the time of Joseph Smith, most Christians maintained an absolutist view of God – and early Mormonism was no different. I wish – oh how I wish – the LDS leaders today would simply perform a rewind on the years of Joseph Smith’s life. They could use his deathSeparation from God—now overcome. Physical death remains, but it no longer separates us from life with God. at the shootout and take all that they have allowed themselves to believe and teach and set it before them, and start rewinding and erasing.

Joseph Smith's Teachings on God's Nature

In doing this they would remove all the non-biblical – even the anti-biblical teachings of the man – and wind up with just another Christian denomination . . . if they allowed themselves to go back far enough. We can say this because Joseph Smith’s earliest writings describe God in the same absolute, infinite, self-existent terms – (or as Professor Harrell writes, quoting Boyd Kirkland in his book, “The Development of the Mormon Doctrine of God”:

“Perfect in all of His attributes and alone in His supremacy.”

Doctrine and Covenants 109:77 supports this insight as it describes God as the

“infinity of fullness from all eternity to all eternity.”

Can you see how the religion started off right – with only a few foibles like all religious groups have. The Mormon Church today could salvage itself while keeping some faith IF it turned from its Smithchian ways, and just retained most of the things that launched the faith at the start.

This nascent LDS teaching is reiterated in Smith’s Book of Mormon, where it says in Moroni 8:18 that God is not a

“changeable being, but He is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity,”

and then adds at verse 17:

“from everlasting to everlasting (God is) the same unchangeable God.”

I have to tell you, this is the God I worship and adore and seek – described right there in the Book of Mormon and in some of the Doctrine and Covenants. Mormonism is not all wrong – it became wrong over the years. This can be fixed. And it would begin by renouncing speeches and stances and teachings like Jayson Kunzlers.

Changes in Mormon Doctrine

I mean a very early revelation of Smith’s (found in Doctrine and Covenants 20:12) says that “God is the same yesterday, today and forever.” Smith’s lectures on faith maintain the same thing. All in harmony with Christianity of that day on out until today. Why? Because that is what the Bible teaches.

But by allowing one man to be the mouthpiece of a religion, and allowing Him to claim that God was giving Him revelations, and to say that those revelations were superior to what had been written, Mormonism allowed Smith – who was just a man – to evolve away from the true and living singular God from eternity to eternity, and to create one of his own fanciful imagination.

It was in what are called the Nauvoo period, a place where Mormonism landed, improved wonderfully, and from where they were utterly and ultimately driven, that things went to Smith’s head . . . and into the theological toilet. There he had amassed great power, wore a military uniform about, took on dozens of women as wives, had himself ordained King of the World, and in a Jonestown/Waco-like way, ramped his revelations up, up and away from the simple humble tenets of the biblical faith.

One of the standards to fall in this period was his earlier admitted views on God the Father. What fell? First God became far less absolute and more finite. He began to exist in time, even to the point of once being a human being.

In June of 1844 He publicly repudiated traditional beliefs in God’s eternality and said at a funeral of a man (appropriately and ironically named, “King” Follett):

“We suppose that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea.”

Now, we have (what should be) mere skirmishes over the make-up of God. But this statement.

Theological Departure

The teaching presented by Joseph Smith marked a significant departure from the biblical description of God. It not only set Christianity on its head but sent Mormonism into an entirely different direction relative to the holiness and eternality of God and the aim and purpose of human life. In this teaching, God was reduced and man was elevated by potentiality.

Smith continued, and said: “God Himself the father of us all dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Himself did, and I will show it from the Bible.” He then said (in an apparent attempt to prove his previous point from the Bible: “The Scriptures inform us that Jesus said: As the Father hath power in Himself – even so hath the Son power.” Smith then asked: To do what?” (and answered) “why what the Father did. The answer is obvious – in a manner to lay down his body and take it up again. Jesus, what are you going to do? To lay down my life as my father did and take it up again.”

Scriptural Interpretations

Here Smith took to separate passages from the Bible:

John 5:6 (which says): “For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself.”

And John 10:17-18 (which says): “Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.”

Smith combined them, stripped them away from their context, and then reinterpreted them by taking some utterly amazing liberties. All alone, these passages say nothing about the Father laying down His life and then taking it up again. All these passage really say is that the Father has given Jesus power over death and commanded Him, the man, to use it.

Another passage that Smith used to support his new ideas on God is John 5:19, which says: “Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.”

According to LDS apologist and scholar Blake Ostler in his, Exploring Mormon Thought, Smith, using this passage in John said: “What did Jesus do? Why I do the things that I saw the Father do when worlds came into existence. I saw the Father work out a kingdom with fear and trembling and I can do the same.” Actually, the Greek interpretation for Jesus words (as used in Young’s Literal Translation) seem to mean that the Son’s actions were in simultaneous and complete harmony with the actions of His invisible Father, and not so much: “I saw my Father do this and so I am going to now do the same.” Harrell points out that when Jesus said in John 14:9 . . .”the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works,” is along the same idea.

LDS Theological Perspectives

From Smith's teachings, LDS men of intellectual reputation have tried to merge his earlier teaching on the eternality of God with his later musings from Nauvoo. In these the postulations get really sticky, and conjectural. For instance, LDS people today often take the BOM passages that say things like God is “from everlasting to everlasting” and they will say things like, “well, He (like we) have always existed in some form or another.” But they ignore that the passage says “GOD has existed from everlasting to everlasting.”

To offset this response, others have had to create more hypothecation. For instance, B.H. Roberts taught that we ought to think of God as “the harmonized community of Divine Intelligences of the Universe” so instead of just thinking of God as one, there is a board of Gods and they HAVE existed from eternity to eternity – in other words, there is an eternal regression of God’s that have always existed. Apostle Orson Pratt taught that we ought to see God abstractly, as the “fullness of Truth,” he said, and therefore wherever and whenever truth is found, God is there.

From the hypothecations of Trinitarians and Modalists, and Unitarians, to the fanciful imaginations of Smith and those who followed-in thereafter, a bad taste forms in the mouth of those who want to know the Only True and Living God and His Son whom He has sent. For me, it seems pretty clear that there is one God who has always been.

The Love and Unity in God's Offering

And He so loved us He gave us a Son – His Son, the first-fruits of Many, His only, His begotten Son – begotten of the Holy Spirit in the Body of a woman, who in God’s name and by God’s power, and for God’s Glory, saved the World out of love. Let’s open up the phone lines – (801) 950-8413

SHOW GRAPHIC WHILE I READ EMAIL PLEASE:

John 17:20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.
25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me.
26 And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.

Baptism and Its Significance

Emails

I was watching an interview you did with Doug. In his interview, you said that baptism by water was done away with and that you only had to be "baptized by the spirit".

My question is this: Does that contradict the Bible? In Acts 10:47-48 Peter was teaching and the spirit fell over all of them that heard the word. However, he later asks them if any man can forbid the water saying in essence even tho you had the Holy Ghost poured upon you, can you go without baptism by water? He then in 48 commands them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.

Biblical Accounts of Baptism Practices

In Acts 19: 2-6, Paul asks some disciples if they have received the holy ghost and they answer "We have not so much heard whether there be any Holy Ghost". He then asks "Well then in what manner were you baptized?" they told him unto the Baptism of John (Remission of sins). He then lays his hands on their head and the Holy Ghost came onto them. In both cases, both Water and the Spirit were done.

Peter said that it wasn't enough to have the spirit and commanded they also be baptized by water. Paul taught that they also needed the spirit. Even LDS believe that the baptism by water is for a remission of sins that it is a burial of your old life to come up out of the water as a disciple of Christ and that afterwards we receive the second baptism by fire through the gift of the Holy Ghost.

So where is that teaching incorrect?

Judging Others in Faith

Also, how does Romans 14 apply to what you do? It says that you shouldn't quarrel over disputable matters when it comes to faith. One will say their faith allows them to eat all while another says they don't eat a certain way. Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To their own master, servants either stand or fall. One person might consider 1 day more sacred while another treats all days the same. Both people, give thanks to God and that is ok.

Why then do you judge your brother? Why do you have contempt for them? We will all stand before God before the judgment seat. Each one of us will give account for ourselves. It then goes on to say that we need to stop passing judgment on others and be a cause to be a stumbling block to them. ("a circumstance that causes difficulty or hesitation.")

Just wondering your thoughts.

From: carlos

Subject: new viewer having a crisis of faith (not what you think)

Message Body:

Hello, I wanted to first thank you for your show. I recently found it on youtube and have been binge watching it. I have a question for you but I think first I should provide some background for myself.

I grew up with very little religious influence and as a teenager joined a Pentecostal church. I was there for a while until I had what I believe was also a crisis of faith and left church because I did not

Finding Faith Amidst Doubt

I feel I found a connection with God and was very disappointed in that. I became and I think still am an agnostic to this day. I am now married to an ex-Mormon woman, we have 3 wonderful children. As far as my wife is concerned she has no intentions of returning to Mormonism (partially due to me and her own self-doubt she has always had with it.) And now to my point after boring you. I have been watching your show a lot and I love it mainly due to the fact that ever since meeting my wife's Mormon family and taking the time to learn about it I knew it was a crazy cult pyramid scheme. So I enjoy becoming more knowledgeable about its direct conflicts with the Bible. I have for a long time believed the Bible to be fiction (especially the Old Testament), but when I watch your show and I hear you speak about Jesus and the New Testament I feel like I have, for lack of a better word, a stirring inside of me. Like I have a void that starts recognizing something that can fill it and make me whole. The problem with this is I am a doubter. So while I recognize that being a Christian would be a wonderful thing I cannot commit but I don’t think I believe it. My question after all this rambling is, what is my next step? I pray and I don’t feel like I ever get anything from it (not looking for the next day answers my in-laws claim to get.) Should I just read the New Testament and see how I feel after a while? I don’t want to sound pathetic as I feel like I am a fairly proud and sufficient man in my position in my house but I almost feel slightly lost or diminished, like if I had something else I would be much more for myself and my family. I know this was long and if you don’t read or answer it I understand. In a way just writing it probably helps me out a little. Anyways have a good day and keep up the show. My wife and I watch it now and appreciate the time you put into it.

Carlos from Peoria Arizona

Reflections on Mormonism and Faith

From: Tim M
Subject: Jayson Kunzler talk

Dear Brother Shawn:

Thank you for playing Kunzler’s talk. I am both ashamed that I ever had anything to do with the Mormon church and appalled at Jayson’s rhetoric. His talk was not only blasphemous, but could have been written by satin himself, if not by lucifer, then at least through the influence of his spirit! Do these people listen to what they’re saying? I pity them and fear for their eternal welfare for if anyone believes Kunzler is speaking the truth then they've not only missed the mark so to speak but are denying the Christ and his saving power. Such heretical, blasphemous beliefs only lead to Hell! Smith was human, not a deity as they would have us believe.

As for me and my house, we will follow the Lord and him alone. God bless you for all you do! Jesus Christ is the one who matters. Joseph Smith is lower than nothing and is best paired with lucifer whom he followed than the Savior! The words and teachings of Jesus bring life. The words and teachings of Joseph Smith bring Hell fire and damnation. It's that cut and dry, plain and simple. Thank you, thank you, thank you for your spirit and example in following the Lord.

Tim M

Personal Faith Journeys

From: Lizzie Morton
Subject: YOUR MINISTRY IS ENCOURAGING

Hi Shawn and all of your helpers,

Thank you for expounding God’s Word and ignoring religious traditions despite all of the persecution you are experiencing. My family left a denominational church over 20 years ago and has relied on a personal relationship with Jesus Christ outside of the evil chains of manmade religion ever since. I don’t know what your interpretation of the Seventh Church Age in Revelation is, but I believe that the Laodicean Church Age is now, and where is Jesus? Outside the church. Jesus never got on well with the Pharisees once he was an adult, and neither do His Children in this Age. They are outside the established church just like Him.

God Bless and continue to lead you Shawn. I have never been Mormon, but it is extremely helpful for me to learn about what the religion is about, as my conversations with lovely people within it now make a lot more sense to me. I write to you all the way from New Zealand.

Shalom,
Lizzie Morton