Footprints in the Sand

Footprints in the Sand

One night I dreamed I was walking along the beach with the Lord. Many scenes from my life flashed across the sky.

In each scene I noticed footprints in the sand. Sometimes there were two sets of footprints, other times there was one only.

This bothered me because I noticed that during the low periods of my life, when I was suffering from anguish, sorrow or defeat, I could see only one set of footprints, so I said to the Lord,

“You promised me Lord,
that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I have noticed that during the most trying periods of my life there has only been one set of footprints in the sand. Why, when I needed you most, have you not been there for me?”

The Lord replied, “The years when you have seen only one set of footprints, my child, is when I carried you.”

I think this is one of my favorite poems. It has been for years. Its been the hope for me in the hard times, the light in the darkness, the thing to cling to when there's nothing else--the Lord will carry me when I need Him the most. 

Lord, you are amazing and bigger than I could ever imagine. Your love and your mercy are awesome. Your Comforter bring peace to my spirit when I am weary. Lord, I promise you my life. It is meager and I am imperfect. I can never be good enough for you. I know you love me despite that, and I can barely even begin to comprehend such a crazy, perfect, unconditional love. I will always seek to love you and love others in return, and when I fall short, I pray you will always forgive me. Lord, I trust you to carry me when I can't walk on my own.

March 6th Sermon

I find it incredibly amazing when a simple sermon from an educated and understanding Christian crushes what I was taught as an LDS member. In one sermon, my pastor crushed two major Mormon concepts without even realizing he was doing so.

The first thing he did was describe the three heavens, based on what the Bible describes and references. The first is the heavens as in space and stars--its a physical heaven. The second is a spiritual heaven--where angels dwell, etc. The third is the abode of God, and this is our ultimate goal. Only three Biblical accounts exist of the third heaven--One in Isaiah, one in Revelations, and a very brief and vague mention by Paul where he doesn't even clarify well whether it was him or someone else who saw it and he says that's its too inexpressible to tell.

So, the three heavens do not refer to the Telestial, Terrestrial, and Celestial glories of LDS beliefs.

Also, Pastor Nate put into perspective the dimensions of the New Jerusalem as taught in Revelations:

21: 16 "The city was laid out like a square, as long as it was wide. He measured the city with the rod and found it to be 12,000 stadia in length, and as wide and high as it is long."

Some versions use the word "furlong" instead of "stadia" but the equivalent is about 1/8th of a mile either way. Basically, when you do all the math, this city (the city of heaven, after the old heaven and earth has passed away, etc) is over 2 million square miles.

This is very interesting because Joseph Smith said that the New Jerusalem would be in Missouri:

D&C 57

1...in this land, which is the land of Missouri, which is the land which I have appointed and consecrated for the gathering of the saints.

 2Wherefore, this is the land of promise, and the place for the city of Zion.

 3And thus saith the Lord your God, if you will receive wisdom here is wisdom. Behold, the place which is now called Independence is the center place; and a spot for the temple is lying westward, upon a lot which is not far from the courthouse.

D&C 84

2Yea, the word of the Lord concerning his church, established in the last days for the restoration of his people, as he has spoken by the mouth of his prophets, and for the gathering of his saints to stand upon Mount Zion, which shall be the city of New Jerusalem.

 3Which city shall be built, beginning at the temple lot, which is appointed by the finger of the Lord, in the western boundaries of the State of Missouri, and dedicated by the hand of Joseph Smith, Jun., and others with whom the Lord was well pleased.

 (Interesting note: Revelations also said there will be no temple in New Jerusalem, and that the city will descend already prepared {as opposed to being built  by people} Also interesting to note, the temple prophesied of was never built even though D&C 84 and D&C 115 make it clear that it was to be built in the generation of the 1830s.)

So, if we look at the size spoken of in Revelations, and then look at Joseph Smith's prophecies about it being built it Missouri, we hit a huge snag. Missouri is way smaller than 2.25 million square miles. In fact, the New Jerusalem will be about 65% of the size of the contiguous United States. There's no way that could fit into Missouri, assuming Missouri as we know it will even be around as a reference point in the new earth.

There's no guarantee that the New Jerusalem will exist as described in Revelations--John was simply trying to put into words what he saw when describing it. But perhaps it was true anyways. Though it might have surpassed his understanding in appearance, it may exist someday in the exact dimensions he described. Joseph Smith's mundane version of the New Jerusalem, while much more comprehensible (and far less amazing), is nothing like the one described in the Bible.

It just amazes me how simply reading the Bible thoroughly and with understanding changes things from the false understandings and teachings of man into the truth and wonder of God.

Where is the Love?

Yesterday, our neighbors spent the day and well into the night blasting ethnic music. When it woke Steven and I up a little before 3:00 am, I tried to call in a noise complaint, but the police force was responding only to emergencies due to a lot of emergencies going on, so I would have had to call again in an hour. Steven instead went downstairs and asked them to turn the music down. The guy who answered the door very ungraciously agreed and told Steven to go away.

I just wonder what makes people so discourteous and unable to consider how their action effect others. I mean, we all do it--we're just humans. Some people are way worse than others, though.

It just makes me if that man calls himself a Christian, or a follower of any religion, personal belief, or world view that believes in showing love to people.  I don't know how people can say they follow something when they don't actually try to follow it.

The best person messes up sometimes; I'm not saying that someone has to be perfect 100% of the time in living the way they say they believe in living. I am saying that people should try. And we as Christians really need to understand that when we say we need to follow Christ, we need to actually follow him or we're not really who or what we say we are. Christ said to love others--so try to love people, even the ones that are hard to love, like my downstairs neighbors. It doesn't take much: you just have to be kind to people and follow the golden rule, even with the people that are hard to deal with. Christ said that suffering can be used to glory God and make you stronger--so don't complain bitterly, but have a positive attitude that this, too, will pass, and may even make you or someone close to you a better person for you having gone through it. Getting through the hard times with an "I can do it" attitude can be good for you no matter your belief system.

Following any belief or religion that includes loving fellow man and following a certain path--whether that's just the path of being a decent human being or the path of trying to follow Christ, or anything in between--is like a game of Simon Says or Follow the Leader. You have to actually follow it. You have to actually do what you're told to do (by scripture or by your conscience). It's not Simon Says to do something and you memorize it. Its not Follow the Leader in your heart but not in deed. Just do it!

There's always room to grow and the ability to be the type of person you say you believe in being. It very simple--do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

God and Science

I see so many religious people who are completely blind to some very important things in being both realistic and faithful in harmony--as much as is possible in this world for the average person, anyways.

God and science can work together.

God isn't a god of chaos, is He? Why would it be so impossible for science to be the how of God's creation? We're just humans, I doubt we'll ever be able to solve every question of science before the world ends. But science is made of up empirical evidence--its not like its a load of BS. Just because science is true doesn't necessarily mean that God is not true. It just means that God and science should work together, or you're probably the one that is wrong.

For instance, the idea that the world is only 6,000 years old that people get from the Bible. Why does that have to be the actual age of the earth? Its not doctrine. Its not essential to salvation, to being a good person, following God's commandments, or the nature of God. The Old Testament is impressively historically accurate, but we as Christians and as reasoning humans need to accept that some of it can be allegorical rather than literal without compromising it as God's Word.

I also think the absolute opposition to evolution is ridiculous, as well. I'm not saying that we evolved from apes or our first ancestors dragged themselves from primordial ooze, but I am saying that we didn't always look and act the way we do now. We are essentially just animals--why do we have to look exactly this way for to still be created in God's image (spiritually, since God is spirit John 4:24)? We are essentially animals in nature, and we have dominion and higher intelligence only because God gave it to us when He gave us individual spirits in His image. Other animals evolve and change over time, why are we such an exception?

Instead of being offended because the Bible isn't perfectly scientifically correct (although the Smithsonian states that its more correct than most other ancient documents) or that we might not have always looked quite the way we do now, we should rejoice at science and what it tells us of God.

Look around. Go outside and look at the sky. Take in the clouds, the blue sky, the sun, or whatever else is up there. See the beauty, the color. Marvel at the idea that there's almost certainly even more colors beyond our comprehension or ability to see. Imagine a sunset with even more colors. Look at a tree and marvel at the inner workings that make it live and grow so large despite having started from something so small. Marvel at how small you began. Then imagine how huge the universe is--and its still growing! Be stunned at the idea that eventually another galaxy is literally going to pass through the Milky Way, so that for a while the two galaxies will intersect. That is how God and science work together, in showing His awesomeness, creativity, and organization to us--no matter whether we've been around six thousand or six billion years.

Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Scriptures

One of the most deceptive things about the church is the Book of Mormon. Without the Book of Mormon, there would be no "Mormon" church. Joseph Smith would have had little or no base for his claims of restoration. It sounds Christian. It sounds similar to the Bible, just with a bit more story line and some pretty epic battles. There's really not any new teachings in the BoM, so its very easy for someone with a Christian background to accept it.

I remember when I first left the church. My grandma called me at 10:00pm on a school night as soon as she found out, unable to wait to call me after school the next day. "But what about the Book of Mormon?" she asked me. "Don't you believe its true?" She was flabbergasted when my answer was no. "But what about chiasmus?" she asked.

Chiasmus (k-eye-as-muss) is a poetical form of writing used in Israel in the same time period at which the Book of Mormon has Nephi and his family leaving Jerusalem. Because of this, the church, through BYU, touts that this is proof that the Book of Mormon really is an authentic historical document. They really don't have much more going for them, so they grasp at anything they can get.
However, this is a pretty weak "proof." Doctrine and Covenants (written or dictated primarily by Joseph Smith) and the Book of Abraham (which supposedly dates from a couple thousand years before chiasmus) both contain this poetical form of writing. So does the Bible, which Joseph Smith read regularly.

On the other hand, there is plenty against the Book of Mormon, the most telling of which is DNA.
The introduction to the Book of Mormon states "After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians." This is actually a new phrasing. Book of Mormon introductions from only a few years ago say that the Lamanites are THE principle ancestors of the Book of Mormon. The teaching that they were principle ancestors instead of just among the ancestors of the American Indians comes from Joseph Smith himself.

"Mormon 1:7 The whole face of the land had become covered with buildings, and the people were as numerous almost, as it were the sand of the sea."

 It stands to reason that a civilization that large would both leave behind much evidence of its existence and would leave a DNA imprint on their descendants. Quite simply, neither exist. DNA and anthropology show that Native Americans are Mongolian in origin and there is almost no DNA relating to the Middle East that would show any civilization of Middle Eastern origin contributing to the DNA pool. I believe there's only .02% that could be related to the Middle East, and its not exclusively from there--its also in Asia and Africa.

Video: DNA vs. The Book of Mormon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GF_SxbPLb0

Quite simply, there is no evidence supporting the Book of Mormon being placed in the real world, more or less the Americas. Linguistics, anthropology, archaeology, DNA, architecture, even the timeline of the existing cultures, are all contrary to the Book of Mormon account.

In fact, here is the letter that Charles Anton wrote to address the claims that he'd agreed that the characters of Reformed Egyptian showed to him by Martin Harris were real:

New York, Feb. 17, 1834.
Dear Sir -- I received this morning your favor of the 9th instant,
and lose no time in making a reply. The whole story about my
having pronouncd the Mormonite inscription to be "reformed
Egyptian hieroglyphics" is perfectly false. Some years ago, a plain,
and apparently simple-hearted farmer, called upon me with a note
from Dr. Mitchell of our city, now deceased, requesting me to
decypher, if possible, a paper, which the farmer would hand me,
and which Dr. M. confessed he had been unable to understand.
Upon examining the paper in question, I soon came to the
conclusion that it was all a trick, perhaps a hoax.
When I asked the person, who brought it, how he obtained the
writing, he gave me, as far as I can now recollect, the following
account: A "gold book," consisting of a number of plates of gold,
fastened together in the shape of a book by wires of the same
metal, had been dug up in the northern part of the state of New
York, and along with the book an enormous pair of "gold
spectacles"! These spectacles were so large, that, if a person
attempted to look through them, his two eyes would have to be
turned towards one of the glasses merely, the spectacles in
question being altogether too large for the breadth of the human
face. Whoever examined the plates through the spectacles, was
enabled not only to read them, but fully to understand their
meaning. All this knowledge, however, was confined at that time
to a young man, who had the trunk containing the book and
spectacles in his sole possession. This young man was placed
behind a curtain, in the garret of a farm house, and being thus concealed from view, put on the spectacles
occasionally, or rather, looked through one of the glasses,
decyphered the characters in the book, and, having committed
some of them to paper, handed copies from behind the curtain, to
those who stood on the outside. Not a word, however, was said
about the plates having been decyphered "by the gift of God."
Everything, in this way, was effected by the large pair of
spectacles. The farmer added, that he had been requested to
contribute a sum of money towards the publication of the "golden
book," the contents of which would, as he had been assured,
produce an entire change in the world and save it from ruin. So
urgent had been these solicitations, that he intended selling his
farm and handing over the amount received to those who wished
to publish the plates. As a last precautionary step, however, he
had resolved to come to New York, and obtain the opinion of the
learned about the meaning of the paper which he brought with him,
and which had been given him as a part of the contents of the
book, although no translation had been furnished at the time by
the young man with the spectacles.
On hearing this odd story, I changed my opinion about the paper,
and, instead of viewing it any longer as a hoax upon the learned,
I began to regard it as part of a scheme to cheat the farmer of his
money, and I communicated my suspicions to him, warning him to
beware of rogues. He requested an opinion from me in writing,
which of course I declined giving, and he then took his leave
carrying the paper with him. This paper was in fact a singular
scrawl. It consisted of all kinds of crooked characters disposed in
columns, and had evidently been prepared by some person who
had before him at the time a book containing various alphabets.
Greek and Hebrew letters, crosses and flourishes, Roman letters
inverted or placed sideways, were arranged in perpendicular
columns, and the whole ended in a rude delineation of a circle divided into
various compartments, decked with various strange marks, and
evidently copied after the Mexican Calender given by Humboldt,
but copied in such a way as not to betray the source whence it
was derived. I am thus particular as to the contents of the paper,
inasmuch as I have frequently conversed with my friends of the
subject, since the Mormonite excitement began, and well remember
that the paper contained any thing else but "Egyptian
Hieroglyphics."
Some time after, the same farmer paid me a second visit. He
brought with him the golden book in print, and offered it to me for
sale. I declined purchasing. He then asked permission to leave the
book with me for examination. I declined receiving it, although his
manner was strangely urgent. I adverted once more to the roguery
which had been in my opinion practised upon him, and asked him
what had become of the gold plates. He informed me that they
were in a trunk with the large pair of spectacles. I advised him to
go to a magistrate and have the trunk examined. He said the
"curse of God" would come upon him should he do this. On my
pressing him, however, to pursue the course which I had
recommended, he told me that he would open the trunk, if I would
take the "curse of God" upon myself. I replied that I would do so
with the greatest willingness, and would incur every risk of that
nature, provided I could only extricate him from the grasp of
rogues. He then left me.
I have thus given you a full statement of all that I know respecting
the origin of Mormonism, and must beg you, as a personal favor,
to publish this letter immediately, should you find my name
mentioned again by these wretched fanatics.
Yours respectfully, CHAS. ANTHON.

The evidence against the Book of Mormon mounts.

On the other hand is the amazing evidence in favor of the Bible. There's always going to be someone who will find some argument against it, but the fact is that the manuscript evidence and the real settings, to such an extent that the Bible has been used to find lost cities, is amazing. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove the accuracy of our current Old Testament. There are thousands of very ancient copies of the New Testament. And yet, Joseph Smith "retranslated" basically all of the Bible, even the parts that can be proven to be intact from before the supposed "great apostacy."

The LDS claim that the Bible has been mistranslated to such an extent that all the most important things are lost is quite simply wrong.

I would recommend "The Case for Christ" video with Lee Strobel.
Also, The Bible vs. The Book of Mormon:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTtq62XQ4jw

Its been amazing to know that, as long as I trust God, I can also trust the Bible.

Psalm 23

Psalm 23

A psalm of David. ¹ The LORD is my shepherd, I lack nothing.
 ² He makes me lie down in green pastures,
he leads me beside quiet waters,
 ³ he refreshes my soul.
He guides me along the right paths
   for his name’s sake.
⁴ Even though I walk
   through the valley of the shadow of death
I will fear no evil,
   for you are with me;
your rod and your staff,
   they comfort me.
 ⁵ You prepare a table before me
   in the presence of my enemies.
You anoint my head with oil;
   my cup overflows.
⁶ Surely your goodness and love will follow me
   all the days of my life,
and I will dwell in the house of the LORD
   forever.


Pastor Nate, the head pastor at New Life Foursquare Church of Everett, spoke on this well-known chapter today. I had never understood how full this chapter really is. I want to go through it one part at a time, like my pastor did.

The Lord is my shepherd--not a shepherd, MY shepherd. He's there for me. He's not there trying to lead my astray. He wants me to follow in his ways, and he wants to bring me back when I stray from the flock, no matter how many times I do so. My shepherd.

I lack nothing (I shall not want in some versions). Remember, this is King David saying this. He is rich. He is successful. He could have had many things, and he certainly had many comforts, but he knew that it wasn't his gold or his power that made sure he was cared for, it was God. The poorest person can still be cared for by God, no matter how hard their circumstances. They certainly don't have to be spiritually wanting if they turn to God.

He makes me lie down in green pastures, he leads me beside quiet waters. He doesn't ask me to lay down in green pastures, he MAKES me. This isn't because he's some forceful God who doesn't give us a choice. He gives us rest in our spirit and even from the stress of life. Sheep need certain things to be able to rest, and they all have to due with security and a sense of well-being. He gives us this so that we can rest. He also sometimes has to remind us that constantly searching for greener pastures is going to give us little rest, and we often have very green pastures right where we are.
Sheep will not drink water if the source of the water is too dangerous for them. They will die of dehydration beside a rushing river. If the shepherd couldn't bring them to a quiet source of water, he would create one by making a pool or channel of water branching off from the rushing water so that the sheep would feel safe to drink. God can make us feel safe enough to drink.

Now think about this picture of walking through a dark valley with steep sides and no apparent end. But then you realize that God is right there watching your back, his rod and his staff at the ready to keep you on his path and beat back the wolves. Everything is a whole lot less scary with God at your back, and you know that even if you can't see it, even if you've gone through many dark valleys, you'll get out of it again because God is there for you. And even more than this, it was David saying this--David, who slew Goliath. David, who was a great warrior and commanded armies. Yet he looked to God to be his protector and get him through the hard times.

When you feel this sure in the Lord, when you can take your rest from the stress of the world and let God refresh your soul, life gets so much easier to handle. There is peace in turbulence and comfort in sadness. You become sure that you will dwell in the house of the Lord and have him with you all your days. What a wonderful way to live out life. How much more peaceful and sure.

I never experienced this in the LDS church. I didn't know how to be that intimate with God--it really isn't taught that a personal relationship with God is the greatest goal. I've come to truly understand this and other similar chapters of the Bible far more than ever before, and I love continuing to understand more and more.

More on the Trinity

1 Thessalonians 5:21 "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."

I grew up believing the Trinity was false and man-made. In the last year, when I left the LDS church and decided to find Jesus the way the Bible talks about him, I've found the reality of the Trinity to be very different. I challenge all who see this, Christian or LDS, to read it carefully and investigate for themselves..

One of the first things I always believed was that the Trinity just didn't make sense. How could three people all be one? Well, let me ask this quest: how can you be three? Your are body, soul (mind, emotions, will), and spirit.

Its like a fire. You take three candles. You light one. You have fire. You use that fire to light the other two. You have three separate flames--but they're all still fire. Or its like time. You have past, present, and future--but its all time. Its like the sun. You get light, heat, and energy from it--but its all the sun. Another fire analogy--fire needs oxygen, fuel, and heat. If you remove any of them, you don't have a fire--but all three together make fire.

The second thing I've come to realize that the Council of Nicaea isn't what I was taught it was. I was always taught that it was a bunch of worldly, uninspired men who imposed their own doctrines without basis in the Word of God. First of all, this isn't historically true. The Council of Nicaea was convened because there were rampant heresies, particularly Arianism, that claimed that Jesus was not God, and many of these heresies even declared Jesus was not divine at all. The Council of Nicaea was convened to stamp out these heresies and establish truth. People like to argue that the word Trinity isn't in the Bible, and therefore the concept isn't there. First of all, words like monotheism aren't in the Bible either, but Christians and Jews are monotheistic. Its just a name for a concept that is in the Bible.

The big question is then to prove that the Trinity IS in the Bible.

First, before I list supporting verses, let's talk about a little bit of Hebrew both as the LDS understand it and as it really is. The LDS make two very important claims:
1) Jehovah (or YHWH, or Yahweh) is Jesus in the Old Testament.
2) Elohim is God's proper name.

In actuality, in Hebrew (which is a language, not a doctrine, so its not really negotiable):
1) Jehovah (or YHWH, or Yahweh) is God's proper name, and is translated LORD or GOD (all capitals).
2) Elohim is a title for God, and is translated as God (capitalized).

Let's look at these two in the context of a very well known verse:

Deuteronomy 6:4
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD"

The way this would be in Hebrew would be:
"Hear, O Israel: Jehovah our Elohim is one Jehovah"

The way that the LDS would translate this would be:
"Hear, O Israel: Jesus our God is one Jesus."

Christians understand it the way it is written. I was surprised and had to completely change some parts of my thinking when reading the Old Testament because of this simple translational fact. I'd also like to add that the Dead Sea Scrolls show that the Hebrew manuscripts the Old Testament is translated from in these days is extremely, extremely accurate as compared to Hebrew Old Testament manuscripts older than Jesus.

Now let's look at some verses that support the Trinity. This is not an exhaustive list, but it proves that the men at the Council of Nicaea were not imposing doctrine without plenty of scriptural back-up.

John 14:4-7 (King James Version)

 "4And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.
 5Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?
 6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
 7If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him."

If you see Christ, you see the Father. That's like saying, "If you see me, you see me."

1 Timothy 3:16 (King James Version)

 "16And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."

You notice how directly and obviously this is stated? "God was manifest in the flesh"! That seems pretty direct.

Isaiah 9:6 (King James Version)

" 6For 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."

So Jesus is the child...and he is The mighty God and The everlasting Father.

Matthew 1:23 (King James Version)

 "23Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us."

Emmanuel is one of Jesus' names...and it means "God with us." I don't think scriptures would lie about who he is in his own name.

John 1:1, 14 (King James Version)
 "1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
"14And 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."

The Word is God and was made flesh...who might that flesh person be? It is Christ. Jesus is also identified as the Word elsewhere in the New Testament. I will list at least one verse below where he is.

John 12:44-45 (King James Version)

" 44Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me.
 45And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me."

Jesus once again says that if you see him, you see God.

John 10:30 (King James Version)

 "30I and my Father are one."

I'm pretty sure Jesus is saying that he and his Father are one...and I don't think he was meaning one in purpose.

Colossians 1:15-17 (King James Version)

 "15[Jesus] is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16For 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:
 17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist."

Compare to:
Genesis 1:1 (King James Version)
" 1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."

So God created all things...and Jesus is the image of God, and Jesus created all things, and is before all things (in other words, he is in the beginning and before the beginning)...which would argue that Jesus is the creator, who is God.

John 20:28-29 (King James Version)

 "28And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God."

Instead of saying, "Thomas, I'm not God,"

"29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou has believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have yet believed."

Jesus acknowledged he was God and blesses Thomas for believing that, and blesses all those who never see him and believe it.

1 John 5:7 (King James Version)

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

That's pretty clearly the Trinity right there. And again, it doesn't say one in purpose. Also, as I promised above, this is one of the places where Christ is called the Word.

John 4:24 (King James Version)

 "24God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."

God being a Spirit explains how these three separate beings can be one. They are all God as far as all being his Spirit. Jesus had the Spirit dwelling in him. God sends his Spirit to us. We, as believers, are therefore called the Body of Christ in the New Testament (1 Corinthians 12:27-28) because the Spirit dwells in us, which also answers how we can be one with God and Christ even though we will never be God. Its beautiful to imagine such a oneness.

Revelation 1:8 (King James Version)

" 8 I (Jesus) am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty."

Is not God the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, the Almighty? Yet Jesus identifies himself as such.


And finally, one of my favorites, which must begin in Exodus:

Exodus 3:13-15 (King James Version)

 "13And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?
 14And 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.
 15And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, the LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations."

God's name is "I AM." This became such a sacred name to the Jew that they were careful how they said the words "I am" so as to not imply that they were God because there is only one God.

And then comes Jesus...

John 8:52-59 (King James Version)

 "52Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death.
 53Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself?
 54Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:
 55Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.
 56Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
 57Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
 58Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
 59Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by."

Read this carefully. When the Jews challenged him on his claims of knowing Abraham and being greater than Abraham, Jesus says, very firmly and clearly, "Before Abraham was, I am." He used I AM very, very definitely and as an identification of himself. He called himself God, the great I AM! And this is why they took up stones to cast at him! They knew exactly what he was saying--that he is God.


God also makes it very clear that he is the only God, which means that there cannot even be a Godhead of three separate Gods, because that would mean there is more than one.

Isaiah 43:10 (King James Version)

 "10Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me."

Isaiah 44:6, 8 (King James Version)

 "6Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
 8Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any."

To believe this, a Christian has to be completely monotheistic. To believe that there are three separate persons in the Godhead jeopardizes this belief into impossibility for a Christian.

 I hope this helps readers--family, friends, Christian, LDS, or whatever else--better understand the Trinity and why I now believe it to be a Biblical doctrine

(Thank you to Shawn McCraney on Heart of the Matter for many of the analogies and a large part of the list of verses)

Crazy Love for God

Even when I was still LDS, if you'd asked me if I as a church member had a crazy love relationship with God, or if other LDS had an intimate and loving relationship with Him, I would have had to say no.

This isn't to say that the LDS don't love God at all, or that all who call themselves Christians are better at loving him. But the "you must do this to be good enough, and if you can do that you're going to move beyond being subject to God to being an equal with him" teachings of the church make it more difficult than I would have ever realized when I believed in it all.

The post above is a link to a video by author of "Crazy Love," Francis Chan. I read this book recently, am participating in a study of it at a local church, and plan to re-read it again soon. It has helped my relationship with God grow deeper and more beautiful than ever.

I find now that someone cannot call them self a true Christian, or honestly know they are saved from their sins, without having a true love relationship with God. It is all over the Bible:
"If ye love me, keep my commandments." John 14:15
the greatest commandment is to "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind" (Luke 10:27) The second greatest it to love others.

I'm not sure how it could get much more obvious than that. If we love Christ, we keep his commandments, and he commands us to love.

Think about the person you love most in life. If you're happily married or in a very serious relationship, this is probably very easy. Can you imagine ever thinking about this person and going, "There has to be something better than this, something beyond just being with them"? Can you imagine looking at them and knowing you have all the love they can give you, and wanting more?

This is what people do to God every day. I remember thinking when I was LDS that there had to be more than just going to heaven and being with God forever. But I never thought of feeling that way about my future husband, nor do I feel that way about my husband now that I am married. Is that right? Should we love God less than we love our spouses, when the greatest commandment is to love him?

If you were to read the New Testament without any preconceptions, do you think you'd find church in the way that many people do church? The way you do church? The way that your religion is? Or do you think that you would find that you were supposed to love God and people as much as you can and that's all Christ truly asks of us?

Don't you want that sort of love relationship with God? Do you have it? I've found that its the most amazing thing you ever could have, and you can never get enough of it.

The Trinity

I once completely ascribed to the LDS notion that the Trinity just didn't make sense. How could one being be three? How could God just be a blob of Spirit or Light or something immaterial? Didn't that limit who and what he was? Why would he say we were made in his image if we weren't?

Well, amazingly, the Trinity can be correct--and it is Biblical--without flying in the face of those questions.

First of all, let's look at the simple reasoning that if there is only one God, then Jesus had to either be God or not be divine at all. Isaiah 43:10 and 44:6, 8 establish this very well. Notice how definite God is:
Before me no god was formed,
nor will there be one after me.
I am the first and I am the last;
apart from me there is no God.
Is there any God besides me?
No, there is no other Rock; I know not one.

Now, if you accept there is only one God, then you have to ask if Jesus was divine. First of all, the heresy that he was not divine was originally called Arianism, and fighting that heresy is the reason that the doctrine of the Trinity was established so firmly. Also, how else could a human be perfect? We were sinful by nature: it is impossible for us to be completely perfect as creations with free will and a knowledge of good and evil which allows us to use that fee will to sin. Furthermore, a mere human couldn't break the bonds of death for everyone and take on the sins of the world for all.

There are many verses that support Jesus being God, including John 1:1,14 and the last few verses of John 8 (Christ identifies himself as "I am," as God does in the burning bush in Exodus), and many others.

It was not in God's physical image that we were made, but in his spiritual image. Before Joseph Smith tampered with the verse, John 4:24 read:
"God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."

Furthermore, we are made up of multiple parts: just consider the separation of body and spirit upon our deaths. I've also been told that our soul is our third part, but I'm not educated upon that aspect, so I can only give so much. I can say, though, that it makes us very much like God indeed: God and our spirit are comparable, Jesus and our bodies are comparable, and the Holy Spirit and perhaps our souls are comparable. We are as triune in nature as God.

I would urge any curious LDS reader to study deeply in the scriptures on whether or not the Trinity is supported within the precious pages. And for those who would say it can't be doctrine because it isn't expressly said in the verses: remember, "monotheism" isn't expressly said either.

The Spirit

I ended up spending General Conference weekend in a Mormon household due to my grandpa's failing health. I mostly read or talked with my husband while my LDS family listened to the Conference, so I didn't hear much of it, but I did hear a few things that I couldn't help but think, "That is so Biblically incorrect!"

The one I was most moved by was the claim that you must be baptized before you can receive the Spirit. The Bible makes it clear that salvation comes through faith in Christ alone, and that the Spirit testifies in Christ and then dwells in you when you accept Christ. Baptism is not necessary to this--you can read my earlier post on baptism to emphasize and understand baptism's importance and Biblical meaning.

I also thought of the man on the cross beside Jesus, who Jesus promised would be in heaven with him despite the man's sins--I seriously doubt that the man had time to be baptized for those sins, yet he was saved at that moment.

There are many Biblical accounts of people who have no record of being baptized who have the Spirit--Pentecost being a mass experience of this, not to mention the apostles themselves.

Receiving the Spirit is so much more beautiful than a "You must do A to get B," especially considering that Jesus isn't going to deny someone his Spirit if the person accepts Jesus and isn't able to obtain baptism. My Jesus wouldn't, anyways, and I frankly don't want your Jesus if he's that unloving.

No, receiving the Spirit is part of the joy of finding Christ--it is truly becoming the Body of Christ, his Church, his Bride. Since it is Christ's Spirit (and God's Spirit, they being a trinity), you are now the body of his spirit upon accepting him as your Lord and Savior. You are part of his priesthood, his purpose, part of him. This is what it means when Jesus tells God that he and God are one and they will let us be one with them--we are all part of the same body, the same spirit--all a part of God.