Pantheistic Mormonism

This essay was written on New Years Day:

One point of contention (among many) we have with Mormons is the issue of the Triune Godhead.  A passage of Calvin, in his commentary on Romans, brings to mind a recent discourse I had with a cousin of mine.  Calvin says this while expounding on the phrase, Declared the Son of God, &c. found in Romans 1:

“A divine power is said to have shone forth in the resurrection of Christ for this reason – because he rose by his own power, as he had often testified: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I sill raise it up again,” (John 2:19;) “No man taketh it from me,” &c.; (John 10:18.)  For he gained victory over death, (to which he yielded with regard to the weakness of the flesh,) not by aid sought from another, but by the celestial operation of his own Spirit.”

To them they deny that Christ Jesus is equal to God the Father and to the Holy Spirit and instead liken each to three, separate, distinct beings. But Calvin’s comments here help describe Christ’s resurrection as originating from his own power and will.  We could list scripture that describes Christ as being God in the flesh.  For instance, on numerous occasions while disputing with the Pharisees, he claims his deity by saying that God is his Father. On another occasion he said the following statement: “Before Abraham was, I am.”  The Jews knew undoubtedly what Jesus was pronouncing; which explains why they picked up stones to kill him.  The Gospels also record Christ receiving worship.  Yet this is forbidden in the Scripture and even angels (servants of the Lord) had instances of people falling down at their feet attempting to worship them.  But they expressly and adamantly forbade it.  So this man must have been far greater than even they!  On yet other occasions Christ is recorded as forgiving sins.  The Pharisees responded, on one such occasion, by saying that only God was able to forgive sins.  But Christ proves his power to forgive sins with a sign – the healing of a man.  Lastly, Christ proves his identity and equality with his Father when he says to Philip, “Don’t you know who I am after I have been with you for such a long time?  He who has seen me has seen the Father”; and “I and the Father are one”.  John comments that Jesus’ words to the Pharisees made himself equal to the Father.

There is no doubt about Jesus’ claim to deity.  Yet the Mormons contrive three separate beings which opposes the orthodox understanding of the Trinity.  This implies the denial of Christ’s own power being sufficient to raise himself from the dead.  It then must be supposed that when Christ died he died as a mere mortal - unable to raise himself up from the dead, as the scripture says, because he would be totally dependent on one of the other “god” beings to do it for him.  So the Mormon concept of the Godhead is not three in one but three deities merely acting in partnership with one another.  By this definition the Mormons alter the Monotheistic understanding of God as reported in Scripture to a polytheistic construct.  This is not our understanding of who God is from the Scriptures. “Here, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is One” (Deuteronomy 6:4).  If this is true (that our God is one) then the Biblical concept of the Trinity cannot be understood as a polytheistic construct. The only possible answer to the Three in One as taught in the Scriptures is that there is one God manifesting Himself in three distinct persons.  So when Christ died on the cross for our sins, the deity did not and could not die.  He still lived even though his body ceased.  The very same power and essence was still seated in heaven and after three days revealed Himself, once again, in the visible form recognizable to his disciples.  They knew him and recognized him even though his body was renewed and transformed as ours will be one day too.

Pantheism teaches that all life shares a life force.  This life force is a part of the universal god manifesting itself in each of us.  So in some sense we are all gods or a part of god.  If we die, a part of the divine nature dies off, only to be renewed again with new life.  We can see how reincarnation is significant in this type of belief system in order that the energy force is constantly renewed.  For energy is a renewable resource as is water and the other elements.  It is not used up but only transformed as the form they are presently in becomes altered. Furthermore, it is not difficult to see that most of these beliefs find their foundation on a polytheistic framework.  It would take a little more time than I have presently to point out how this overly simplistic synopsis of polytheism marks Mormonism deeply.  But suffice it to say that every one of these points in polytheism finds their corresponding representation in Mormon doctrine; and since this is understood, Scripture must be interpreted through this lens even if it is contradictory to what the Scripture actually says.  I know what I say here requires that I back it up in some way and I will do this in my next posting.  But in the meantime it follows that there is an element of personal bias inherent in the Mormon doctrine.  The bias is towards a personal relativistic interpretation of the Bible; that is, what does Scripture mean to me personally (Scripture is not viewed as authoritative or infallible to the Mormon believer)?  This is in contrast to what the Scripture actually says in context and in light of the thrust of the whole of scripture; that is, the Canon.  For that, we must look at it from the context of God’s sovereign power and control of all things temporal and all things eternal; all things earthly and all things heavenly; all things personal and all things spiritual.  For the scripture declares that the earth and everything in it belongs to the Lord (Psalms 24:1).

So why would the Mormon reject the orthodox Trinitarian view of the Godhead? What advantage is it to them to reject it?  Well first let me entertain their notion of God.  Just what does this do to the rendering of Scripture?  Well we encounter our first problem: How could we understand and interpret Christ’s words to the effect of his seeming equality to his Father?  Traditional responses like C.S Lewis’ Lord, lunatic, and liar cannot really apply since they say they believe Jesus was God.  But we complicate things when we enter into the equation their belief that Christ was merely a created being.  So now we have a host of other problems to overcome along with the first.  By way of defending them on the first would be simply to put it in a patriarchal or Kingly way.  The firstborn inherits all the belongings of the father upon death.  The Prince was acknowledged as the next king but only when the first king died.  But, in the case of Christ, it was the Son who died or the prince.  Do we expect that the Eternal one will pass on so that Christ will take his place?  In the home, the children are part of the parents and because of this they accord special privileges and benefits but they are not the parents.  So I would never expect my son to say to his friend, “Ben, if you see me you have seen my father”.  Or, “Don’t you know Ben that my father and I are one?”  That is crazy language!  But I am not a god either.  But yet according to the Mormon, I did exist previously in heaven!  So the father is not going to die anytime soon since he is the Eternal one yet Jesus uses this language.  In each of these accounts we see displayed the filial affection unlike anything ever heard of before; words of seeming prideful audacity mixing in with such humble submission to his Father.  Yet the miracles and display of authoritative power are signs reminiscing of what the prophets described so long ago about the nature and identity of the Messiah.  Isaiah specifically points out: that He was the Almighty God, Prince of Peace and Wonderful Councilor – All the persons of the Godhead represented in the Babe from Bethlehem.  We read in John 1 Jesus being mentioned as the Word of God, who was from the beginning and that he was the Creator.  But a retort from the Mormons might be that the Father created him for this express purpose – to create; but why?  Why could not the Father do this himself?  He needed to create the second person of the Godhead in order to create other things?  Perhaps he needed to create the second person of the Godhead so that he could make him suffer and die – because he knew how much pain it would cause and was not willing to do so himself?  If that was the case, Jesus could never be the perfect Lamb of God sufficient for covering over and eradicating our sins once and for all!  If he is merely a created being then his sacrifice is insufficient and thus everything he came here to do is all moot – it is null and void and we are utterly helpless and hopeless and the point is all wasted. This explains the work-based mentality of the Mormon system.  There really is no grace of Christ through faith.  We have violated God the Eternal One with our sin. What aught have we against a created being even if that being has been ordained to be a god with the Father?  In that case, since our sin was against the Father it was only he we violated trust; since his law is perfect and we are not, it was he who should have died in the place of Christ!  This is all such foolishness and makes a confusing mess of the Scriptures!

All this reasoning, I think, is sufficient to show, in a small way, the fallacy of Mormons thinking that they are Christian.  For they will say that they believe the same things we do but in so saying they think to apprehend the liberty we have in Christ, in which they have no part nor authority to apprehend.  But they seek it all the same since they think being a Christian is merely assenting to the historical figure that once lived, or agreeing to portions of his teaching that are understandable to them.  But this is only assenting to the use of the word, “Christian”. It is only a connotation word; the true doctrinal belief of the Person of Jesus Christ is absent.  If they reject the Nicene Creed (which we all agree to, to describe what it is that makes us Christian) then automatically that has to set up warning bells inside of us that they are not one of us at all.  Since this is so, their error must be diligently exposed for they act deceptively taking captive those who are weak and ignorant.

-Joe