Why I cannot be a member of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
 |  |  |  |  |  |
I could not be a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, because of many
illogical, unBiblical and dishonest doctrines which exist in the church’s statements and writings
and also in the writings and statements of its founder Joseph Smith and one of the church’s most
influential leaders Brigham Young. My reasons are listed below.
I could not be a member of the LDS Church because of their denial of Christ’s conception by the
Holy Spirit. Brigham Young wrote in Journal of Discourses pages 50-51 of Volume 1 :
“When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness.
He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost.
In the Bible, which Latter-day Saints still believe to be of great importance, it says in Matthew 1:19-
20:
19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was
minded to put her away privily.
20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a
dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is
conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
There is quite obviously a conflict here between the Bible and Mormonism. Brigham Young, a very
influential leader in the history of Mormonism, states very plainly that he believes that Christ was
“not begotten by the Holy Ghost” and yet the Bible says that He was. I cannot join a religious group
that is so clearly confused in their own theology. The choice here logically leaves only two
alternatives. Either Brigham Young is right or the Bible is. Any basic logic course will tell you that A
cannot be NON-A so therefore two statements that say exactly opposite things cannot both be
true, one statement must be incorrect.
I could not be a member of the LDS church because of many miscellaneous errors that show that
the author of the Book of Mormon clearly had a poor command of language, logic and facts in
general some of which are as follows :
1. Ether 15:30-31 says
“And it came to pass that when Coriantumr had leaned upon his sword, that he rested a little, he
smote off the head of Shiz.
And it came to pass that after he had smitten off the head of Shiz, that Shiz raised up on his hands
and fell; and after that he had struggled for breath, he died.”
If the illogical statements of these first two verses is not at first apparent I will seek to elucidate. In
verse 30 it states that the head of Shiz is smote off by Coriantumr Then in verse 31 it says that
“Shiz raised up on his hands and fell; and after that he had struggled for breath, he died.” I would
venture a guess, though I have never personally experienced having my head cut off, that the
likelihood of a man missing his head, then being able to get up on his hands, then after that being
able to take his last breath is highly improbable.
2. 3 Nephi 8:6 make another interesting statement.
And there were exceedingly sharp lightnings, such as never had been known in all the land.
While lightning has a pointed, jagged appearance I do not know that you could necessarily say that
lightning is sharp like a sword
3. Also, in 3 Nephi 8:21-23 it states that during the time Christ was on the cross that was three
days of darkness:
21 And there could be no light, because of the darkness, neither candles, neither torches; neither
could there be fire kindled with their fine and exceedingly dry wood, so that there could not be any
light at all;
22 And there was not any light seen, neither fire, nor glimmer, neither the sun, nor the moon, nor
the stars, for so great were the mists of darkness which were upon the face of the land.
23 And it came to pass that it did last for the space of three days that there was no light seen; and
there was great mourning and howling and weeping among all the people continually; yea, great
were the groanings of the people, because of the darkness and the great destruction which had
come upon them.
Scripture states that in Jerusalem there was space of three hours of darkness as opposed to
three days. This begs the logical question what caused the darkness, did clouds cover the sun
was the sun blotted out and why for 72 hours instead of 3? There is extra-Biblical evidence for the
darkness described in the Bible .
Unfortunately, for the LDS church there is no other evidence to substantiate the Book of Mormon’s
claims. Granted, writings, histories and records were not as carefully preserved in South America
as on other continents, but it is reasonable to say that a record of such miraculous occurrence
would be recorded and furthermore the question still remains as to why the darkness lasted so
long in South America.
I could not be a member of the Mormon Church due to their original stance on the inferiority of
those who have a darker skin color, in other words their promotion of racism. In 1978 the Mormon
Church reversed its position and changed their views with a new “revelation”, but up until 1958 the
church was still following this doctrine strongly:
We know the circumstances under which the posterity of Cain (and later of Ham), were cursed
with what we call Negroid racial characteristics.
The one unfortunate thing for the church is that” The Book of Mormon: another testament of Jesus
Christ” stands in great contrast to their reversal when it says in II Nephi 5:21:
And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their
iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a
flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be
enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.
And also in III Nephi 2:15
And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites;
The first passage demonstrates that having dark skin was a curse, and the second shows that
having white skin is a removal of the curse. Is the church now willing to say that God has
completely changed his mind in the area of skin color being a curse? Through much of my study in
the Bible it is clear to me that there is only one race: The human race. Good scientific evidence
even by those who do not believe the Bible has demonstrated that really the only difference
between each human is about 0.02 percent. The only thing that really dictates our skin color is the
coloring pigment we have contained within our skin which is called, Melanin .
Their “wishy-washiness” is quite evident here and shows how their revelations arrive very
conveniently when a doctrine within the church appears unpopular, such as also in the case of the
church’s reversal on their doctrine of Polygamy.
Joseph Smith’s Statement that “Our bodies must return to their mother earth” is highly
disconcerting. Could it really be said that the earth is our mother when it says in Genesis 1:1 that
God created? This, I think, is a good example of the pantheistic doctrine of “oneness with the
earth” that Joseph Smith believed in.
I could not be a member of the Mormon Church because of their view on the doctrine of the
personality of God. Joseph Smith said: “God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted
man...” . Needless to say here is a problem with arguing that God is flesh and bone like us. As Dr.
Walter Martin so aptly put it in one of his audio sermons, when a Mormon said that there are
references to God’s ears, eyes and hands, Dr. Martin also showed that there are also references
to God having wings, being a door and an all consuming fire. Is God then either respectively a
Chicken, wood with hinges or a blast furnace? The whole concept of even thinking that God is a
man just like we are is truly humorous, but this thought is still very much within the church today.
Another example of the churches dishonesty and beating about the bush around the true meaning
of their doctrine as Dr Gordon B. Hinckley current head of the LDS church shows in his writings,
then in interviews with two major news publishers.
1. “On the other hand, the whole design of the gospel is to lead us onward and upward to greater
achievement, even, eventually, to godhood. This great possibility was enunciated by the Prophet
Joseph Smith in the King Follet sermon (see Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 342-62)
and emphasized by President Lorenzo Snow. It is this grand and incomparable concept: As God
now is, man may become! (See The Teachings of Lorenzo Snow, comp. Clyde J. Williams, Salt
Lake City: Bookcraft, 1984, p. 1) Our enemies have criticized us for believing in this. Our reply is
that this lofty concept in no way diminishes God the Eternal Father. He is the Almighty. He is the
Creator and Governor of the universe. He is the greatest of all and will always be so. But just as
any earthly father wishes for his sons and daughters every success in life, so I believe our Father
in Heaven wishes for his children that they might approach him in stature and stand beside him
resplendent in godly strength and wisdom. (Conference Report, Oct. 1994)”
2. Q: There are some significant differences in your beliefs. For instance, don't Mormons believe
that God was once a man?
A: I wouldn't say that. There was a little couplet coined, "As man is, God once was. As God is, man
may become.'' Now that's more of a couplet than anything else. (San Francisco Chronicle.
Interviewed in March 1997, Published April 13th 1997)
3. Q: ... about that, God the Father was once a man as we were. This is something that Christian
writers are always addressing. Is this the teaching of the church today, that God the Father was
once a man like we are?
A: I don’t know that we teach it. I don’t know that we emphasize it. I haven’t heard it discussed for a
long time in public discourse. I don’t know. I don’t know all the circumstances under which that
statement was made. I understand the philosophical background behind it. But I don’t know a lot
about it and I don’t know that others know a lot about it. (TIME MAGAZINE
AUGUST 4, 1997 VOL. 150 NO. 5)
Even to the elementary reader it should be obvious that there is a direct contradiction between the
first statement and the other two. The cloaking of true Mormon doctrine is self evident with Mr.
Hinckley’s saying that he does not “know that we teach it” or has not “heard it discussed for a
long time in public discourse”. When in fact Mr. Hinckley did teach this very same doctrine only 3
years previously. The whole principle of man being able to become like God is unquestionably a
part of Mormon theology. In Doctrines and Covenants section 132 it says:
And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new
and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is
anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be
said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first
resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and
powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, that
he shall commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and
commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things
whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full
force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are
set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which
glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.
20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to
everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject
unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have cal l power, and the angels are subject
unto them.
The Bible clearly states that there are no “gods” before or after the one true God.
In Deuteronomy 4:39
Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above,
and upon the earth beneath: there is none else.
Isaiah 43:10
Ye 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.(emphasis mine)
And James 2:19
Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
I could not be a member of the LDS Church because of its doctrinal roots in polygamy.
Joseph Smith stated:
"The same God that has thus far dictated me and directed me and strengthened me in this work,
gave me this revelation and commandment on celestial and plural marriage, and the same God
commanded me to obey it. He said to me that unless I accepted it, and introduced it, and practiced
it, I, together with my people would be damned and cut off from this time henceforth. We have got
to observe it. It is an eternal principle and was given by way of commandment and not by way of
instruction." (Prophet Joseph Smith, Contributor, Vol. 5, p. 259)
Joseph Smith at one time denied being a polygamist, but there is much evidence that can easily
substantiate that he was and certainly that Mormonism teaches it as is evident in Doctrines and
Covenants also in section 132.
61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to
espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are
virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they
are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that belongeth unto him and to no one else.
62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong
to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has
committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish
the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father
before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear
the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified.
The author is not exactly sure if there is a specific Mormon doctrine that exempts those of a
certain level of priesthood to have many wives for he has found nothing to substantiate the
apparent contradiction in Mormon theology, but in light of the next passage any Mormon
arguments seeking to clarify or justify the two above statements stumble terribly in light of the
Mormon’s own foundational book which says:
“Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable
before me, saith the Lord.” Jacob 2:24
Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man
among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none; Jacob 2:27
How can this be reconciled? If a thing is abominable in the sight of God how can be alright later on
even in Mormon theology? This shows a clear lack of consistency and the fallacy of writings used
for whatever doctrine is convenient for the moment.
In the Bible there are many examples of people who have practiced Polygamy usually at a very low
point in their faith such examples being Abraham, Sarah and Hagar and David and his many
concubines to Solomon’s incredible number. However none of these marriages were happy or
went without consequences . Abraham’s son by Hagar, Ishmael became head of the Arabs who
seek the destruction of Israel to this day. David’s marriages led to incest and eventually murder
among his children and Solomon’s wives led him into idol worship and ultimately the division of
Israel which was never united until as recent as 1948.
In Genesis 2:24 it says:
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they
shall be one flesh.
In the tenth commandment, in Exodus 20:10 it says “thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife”.
Clearly we are viewing a world which God intended there to be only marriages with one wife.
In Mark 10:8 it says:
And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
Notice here that it does not say “they four” or “they five”. Perhaps the best example to use is in
Ephesians 5:22-23:
22. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
23. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the
saviour of the body.
When Christ returns which bride in the church will he return to if polygamy is correct? Obviously
God knows that such things are done in the world and required provision for the extra wife in
Exodus 21:10. However, God did not bless such marriages with joy as shown though each of the
examples listed above. He has always special provisions in His word for those who make bad
choices such as those who have a relationship outside of marriage, but there are consequences
for doing such unwise and sinful things that he does not withhold. Christ intended marriage to be
between one man and woman for life.
The idea of celestial marriages is also decimated by these words of Christ in Matthew 22.30:
For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God
in heaven.
I could not be a member of the Mormon Church for many reasons which are due to logic that
shows ridiculous inconsistencies in their beliefs and practices. I also could not be a member
because of the many doctrines that, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and the LDS leadership of the
church today, have promoted and continue to promote that are in complete antithesis to the Bible.
Reference Notes
1. http://journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_01/refJDvol1-10.html
2. STATEMENT DM192, BOOK OF MORMON VS. THE BIBLE
(OR COMMON SENSE); by: Marian Bodine
http://www.equip.org/site/c.muI1LaMNJrE/b.2857027/k.
BA99/DM192.htm
3. Annals of the World by James Ussher; Page. 822
4. Bruce McConkie, Apostle of the Mormon Council of 12,
Mormon Doctrine, p. 554, 1958. Quoted in the book By Ken Ham
on the Christian answers to racism One Blood. http://www.
answersingenesis.org/home/area/OneBlood/chapter6.asp
5. One Blood by Ken Ham, Carl Wieland and Don Batten;
Chapter 4, One Race, http://www.answersingenesis.
org/home/area/OneBlood/chapter4.asp
6. http://journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_07/refJDvol7-36.html
7. Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith and History of the
Church, 6:302-17
http://www.boap.org/LDS/Joseph-Smith/Teachings/T6.html
8. http://www.lds-mormon.com/gbh.shtml
This spelling error exists on the official website of the Mormon
Church from which this directly copied.
9. “Call” may mean “all” and must be a spelling error on the
official website that this was copied from
10. http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/132
11. http://i4m.com/think/history/angel_sword.htm
12. Polygamy Chart of Joseph Smith
http://i4m.com/think/polygamy/JS_Polygamy_Timeline.htm
13. Does the Bible Really Teach Monogamy? By Jonathan
Sarfati
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4074.asp
illogical, unBiblical and dishonest doctrines which exist in the church’s statements and writings
and also in the writings and statements of its founder Joseph Smith and one of the church’s most
influential leaders Brigham Young. My reasons are listed below.
I could not be a member of the LDS Church because of their denial of Christ’s conception by the
Holy Spirit. Brigham Young wrote in Journal of Discourses pages 50-51 of Volume 1 :
“When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness.
He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost.
In the Bible, which Latter-day Saints still believe to be of great importance, it says in Matthew 1:19-
20:
19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was
minded to put her away privily.
20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a
dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is
conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
There is quite obviously a conflict here between the Bible and Mormonism. Brigham Young, a very
influential leader in the history of Mormonism, states very plainly that he believes that Christ was
“not begotten by the Holy Ghost” and yet the Bible says that He was. I cannot join a religious group
that is so clearly confused in their own theology. The choice here logically leaves only two
alternatives. Either Brigham Young is right or the Bible is. Any basic logic course will tell you that A
cannot be NON-A so therefore two statements that say exactly opposite things cannot both be
true, one statement must be incorrect.
I could not be a member of the LDS church because of many miscellaneous errors that show that
the author of the Book of Mormon clearly had a poor command of language, logic and facts in
general some of which are as follows :
1. Ether 15:30-31 says
“And it came to pass that when Coriantumr had leaned upon his sword, that he rested a little, he
smote off the head of Shiz.
And it came to pass that after he had smitten off the head of Shiz, that Shiz raised up on his hands
and fell; and after that he had struggled for breath, he died.”
If the illogical statements of these first two verses is not at first apparent I will seek to elucidate. In
verse 30 it states that the head of Shiz is smote off by Coriantumr Then in verse 31 it says that
“Shiz raised up on his hands and fell; and after that he had struggled for breath, he died.” I would
venture a guess, though I have never personally experienced having my head cut off, that the
likelihood of a man missing his head, then being able to get up on his hands, then after that being
able to take his last breath is highly improbable.
2. 3 Nephi 8:6 make another interesting statement.
And there were exceedingly sharp lightnings, such as never had been known in all the land.
While lightning has a pointed, jagged appearance I do not know that you could necessarily say that
lightning is sharp like a sword
3. Also, in 3 Nephi 8:21-23 it states that during the time Christ was on the cross that was three
days of darkness:
21 And there could be no light, because of the darkness, neither candles, neither torches; neither
could there be fire kindled with their fine and exceedingly dry wood, so that there could not be any
light at all;
22 And there was not any light seen, neither fire, nor glimmer, neither the sun, nor the moon, nor
the stars, for so great were the mists of darkness which were upon the face of the land.
23 And it came to pass that it did last for the space of three days that there was no light seen; and
there was great mourning and howling and weeping among all the people continually; yea, great
were the groanings of the people, because of the darkness and the great destruction which had
come upon them.
Scripture states that in Jerusalem there was space of three hours of darkness as opposed to
three days. This begs the logical question what caused the darkness, did clouds cover the sun
was the sun blotted out and why for 72 hours instead of 3? There is extra-Biblical evidence for the
darkness described in the Bible .
Unfortunately, for the LDS church there is no other evidence to substantiate the Book of Mormon’s
claims. Granted, writings, histories and records were not as carefully preserved in South America
as on other continents, but it is reasonable to say that a record of such miraculous occurrence
would be recorded and furthermore the question still remains as to why the darkness lasted so
long in South America.
I could not be a member of the Mormon Church due to their original stance on the inferiority of
those who have a darker skin color, in other words their promotion of racism. In 1978 the Mormon
Church reversed its position and changed their views with a new “revelation”, but up until 1958 the
church was still following this doctrine strongly:
We know the circumstances under which the posterity of Cain (and later of Ham), were cursed
with what we call Negroid racial characteristics.
The one unfortunate thing for the church is that” The Book of Mormon: another testament of Jesus
Christ” stands in great contrast to their reversal when it says in II Nephi 5:21:
And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their
iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a
flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be
enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.
And also in III Nephi 2:15
And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites;
The first passage demonstrates that having dark skin was a curse, and the second shows that
having white skin is a removal of the curse. Is the church now willing to say that God has
completely changed his mind in the area of skin color being a curse? Through much of my study in
the Bible it is clear to me that there is only one race: The human race. Good scientific evidence
even by those who do not believe the Bible has demonstrated that really the only difference
between each human is about 0.02 percent. The only thing that really dictates our skin color is the
coloring pigment we have contained within our skin which is called, Melanin .
Their “wishy-washiness” is quite evident here and shows how their revelations arrive very
conveniently when a doctrine within the church appears unpopular, such as also in the case of the
church’s reversal on their doctrine of Polygamy.
Joseph Smith’s Statement that “Our bodies must return to their mother earth” is highly
disconcerting. Could it really be said that the earth is our mother when it says in Genesis 1:1 that
God created? This, I think, is a good example of the pantheistic doctrine of “oneness with the
earth” that Joseph Smith believed in.
I could not be a member of the Mormon Church because of their view on the doctrine of the
personality of God. Joseph Smith said: “God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted
man...” . Needless to say here is a problem with arguing that God is flesh and bone like us. As Dr.
Walter Martin so aptly put it in one of his audio sermons, when a Mormon said that there are
references to God’s ears, eyes and hands, Dr. Martin also showed that there are also references
to God having wings, being a door and an all consuming fire. Is God then either respectively a
Chicken, wood with hinges or a blast furnace? The whole concept of even thinking that God is a
man just like we are is truly humorous, but this thought is still very much within the church today.
Another example of the churches dishonesty and beating about the bush around the true meaning
of their doctrine as Dr Gordon B. Hinckley current head of the LDS church shows in his writings,
then in interviews with two major news publishers.
1. “On the other hand, the whole design of the gospel is to lead us onward and upward to greater
achievement, even, eventually, to godhood. This great possibility was enunciated by the Prophet
Joseph Smith in the King Follet sermon (see Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 342-62)
and emphasized by President Lorenzo Snow. It is this grand and incomparable concept: As God
now is, man may become! (See The Teachings of Lorenzo Snow, comp. Clyde J. Williams, Salt
Lake City: Bookcraft, 1984, p. 1) Our enemies have criticized us for believing in this. Our reply is
that this lofty concept in no way diminishes God the Eternal Father. He is the Almighty. He is the
Creator and Governor of the universe. He is the greatest of all and will always be so. But just as
any earthly father wishes for his sons and daughters every success in life, so I believe our Father
in Heaven wishes for his children that they might approach him in stature and stand beside him
resplendent in godly strength and wisdom. (Conference Report, Oct. 1994)”
2. Q: There are some significant differences in your beliefs. For instance, don't Mormons believe
that God was once a man?
A: I wouldn't say that. There was a little couplet coined, "As man is, God once was. As God is, man
may become.'' Now that's more of a couplet than anything else. (San Francisco Chronicle.
Interviewed in March 1997, Published April 13th 1997)
3. Q: ... about that, God the Father was once a man as we were. This is something that Christian
writers are always addressing. Is this the teaching of the church today, that God the Father was
once a man like we are?
A: I don’t know that we teach it. I don’t know that we emphasize it. I haven’t heard it discussed for a
long time in public discourse. I don’t know. I don’t know all the circumstances under which that
statement was made. I understand the philosophical background behind it. But I don’t know a lot
about it and I don’t know that others know a lot about it. (TIME MAGAZINE
AUGUST 4, 1997 VOL. 150 NO. 5)
Even to the elementary reader it should be obvious that there is a direct contradiction between the
first statement and the other two. The cloaking of true Mormon doctrine is self evident with Mr.
Hinckley’s saying that he does not “know that we teach it” or has not “heard it discussed for a
long time in public discourse”. When in fact Mr. Hinckley did teach this very same doctrine only 3
years previously. The whole principle of man being able to become like God is unquestionably a
part of Mormon theology. In Doctrines and Covenants section 132 it says:
And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new
and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is
anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be
said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first
resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and
powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, that
he shall commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and
commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things
whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full
force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are
set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which
glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.
20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to
everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject
unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have cal l power, and the angels are subject
unto them.
The Bible clearly states that there are no “gods” before or after the one true God.
In Deuteronomy 4:39
Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above,
and upon the earth beneath: there is none else.
Isaiah 43:10
Ye 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.(emphasis mine)
And James 2:19
Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
I could not be a member of the LDS Church because of its doctrinal roots in polygamy.
Joseph Smith stated:
"The same God that has thus far dictated me and directed me and strengthened me in this work,
gave me this revelation and commandment on celestial and plural marriage, and the same God
commanded me to obey it. He said to me that unless I accepted it, and introduced it, and practiced
it, I, together with my people would be damned and cut off from this time henceforth. We have got
to observe it. It is an eternal principle and was given by way of commandment and not by way of
instruction." (Prophet Joseph Smith, Contributor, Vol. 5, p. 259)
Joseph Smith at one time denied being a polygamist, but there is much evidence that can easily
substantiate that he was and certainly that Mormonism teaches it as is evident in Doctrines and
Covenants also in section 132.
61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to
espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are
virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they
are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that belongeth unto him and to no one else.
62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong
to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has
committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish
the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father
before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear
the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified.
The author is not exactly sure if there is a specific Mormon doctrine that exempts those of a
certain level of priesthood to have many wives for he has found nothing to substantiate the
apparent contradiction in Mormon theology, but in light of the next passage any Mormon
arguments seeking to clarify or justify the two above statements stumble terribly in light of the
Mormon’s own foundational book which says:
“Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable
before me, saith the Lord.” Jacob 2:24
Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man
among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none; Jacob 2:27
How can this be reconciled? If a thing is abominable in the sight of God how can be alright later on
even in Mormon theology? This shows a clear lack of consistency and the fallacy of writings used
for whatever doctrine is convenient for the moment.
In the Bible there are many examples of people who have practiced Polygamy usually at a very low
point in their faith such examples being Abraham, Sarah and Hagar and David and his many
concubines to Solomon’s incredible number. However none of these marriages were happy or
went without consequences . Abraham’s son by Hagar, Ishmael became head of the Arabs who
seek the destruction of Israel to this day. David’s marriages led to incest and eventually murder
among his children and Solomon’s wives led him into idol worship and ultimately the division of
Israel which was never united until as recent as 1948.
In Genesis 2:24 it says:
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they
shall be one flesh.
In the tenth commandment, in Exodus 20:10 it says “thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife”.
Clearly we are viewing a world which God intended there to be only marriages with one wife.
In Mark 10:8 it says:
And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
Notice here that it does not say “they four” or “they five”. Perhaps the best example to use is in
Ephesians 5:22-23:
22. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
23. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the
saviour of the body.
When Christ returns which bride in the church will he return to if polygamy is correct? Obviously
God knows that such things are done in the world and required provision for the extra wife in
Exodus 21:10. However, God did not bless such marriages with joy as shown though each of the
examples listed above. He has always special provisions in His word for those who make bad
choices such as those who have a relationship outside of marriage, but there are consequences
for doing such unwise and sinful things that he does not withhold. Christ intended marriage to be
between one man and woman for life.
The idea of celestial marriages is also decimated by these words of Christ in Matthew 22.30:
For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God
in heaven.
I could not be a member of the Mormon Church for many reasons which are due to logic that
shows ridiculous inconsistencies in their beliefs and practices. I also could not be a member
because of the many doctrines that, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and the LDS leadership of the
church today, have promoted and continue to promote that are in complete antithesis to the Bible.
Reference Notes
1. http://journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_01/refJDvol1-10.html
2. STATEMENT DM192, BOOK OF MORMON VS. THE BIBLE
(OR COMMON SENSE); by: Marian Bodine
http://www.equip.org/site/c.muI1LaMNJrE/b.2857027/k.
BA99/DM192.htm
3. Annals of the World by James Ussher; Page. 822
4. Bruce McConkie, Apostle of the Mormon Council of 12,
Mormon Doctrine, p. 554, 1958. Quoted in the book By Ken Ham
on the Christian answers to racism One Blood. http://www.
answersingenesis.org/home/area/OneBlood/chapter6.asp
5. One Blood by Ken Ham, Carl Wieland and Don Batten;
Chapter 4, One Race, http://www.answersingenesis.
org/home/area/OneBlood/chapter4.asp
6. http://journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_07/refJDvol7-36.html
7. Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith and History of the
Church, 6:302-17
http://www.boap.org/LDS/Joseph-Smith/Teachings/T6.html
8. http://www.lds-mormon.com/gbh.shtml
This spelling error exists on the official website of the Mormon
Church from which this directly copied.
9. “Call” may mean “all” and must be a spelling error on the
official website that this was copied from
10. http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/132
11. http://i4m.com/think/history/angel_sword.htm
12. Polygamy Chart of Joseph Smith
http://i4m.com/think/polygamy/JS_Polygamy_Timeline.htm
13. Does the Bible Really Teach Monogamy? By Jonathan
Sarfati
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4074.asp
By Andrew Riffenburgh