Garza’s analysis sharply exposes the logical friction between Mormonism’s early Trinitarian rhetoric and its later polytheistic doctrines. It provides a clear deconstruction of a theological framework that lacks internal consistency regarding the nature of God.
Install our extension to search inside any video instantly.
One Mormon, One Unitarian, One God? Seriously?Added:
Bible Answers with Dr. Al Garza.
>> All right, welcome back to another edition of Bible Answers Unfiltered and Black Belt Theology and Apologetics. I'm your host, Dr. Al Garza. So, today is kind of interesting. I wasn't really planning to do this today or you know go online but or go live but I did come across this live video discussion between Metaphysic Mike and of course Jacob Hansen who's an LDS Mormon and I thought it was very interesting in a in a sense also kind of comical uh because basically these two men are truly opposites in their theology whether whether they which I know they know well I'll get back to that they are truly opposite in their theology, their view of God, um, and who Jesus is and all that. In fact, Mike, uh, in this interview admits that he knows nothing really about Mormonism except in high school he received two Book of Mormons from a friend of his from high school, but other than that, he's never talked to a Mormon. So, he knows nothing about the LDS church, the Mormons, or anything like that. but he decided to have Jacob Hansen on who is an LDS uh church member of known as a Mormon uh in order to uh talk or or bash the Trinity pretty much and try and refute it. Uh and Mike invite invites him because Jacob has been a number of debates with God logic and other people on the Trinity discussing the Trinity and is kind of rising up in that area within the uh YouTube mainstream media and so forth. So, it's interesting because uh I thought it was comical that these two people who, you know, especially with with with with Mike, uh brings them on to discuss the trinity as if they both agree on the nature of God or who God is. I I I thought it was truly hilarious. Um you know, I grew up let me give let me talk about what I why I think this is so funny. And I thought it was really a very unfruitful and in some ways very dumb discussion to have um especially about the trinity. And I'm gonna say that clearly because you know uh I'm someone who you know was born in the early 70 had my childhood in the 70s. I was a teenager in the 80s pretty much early adult years in the 90s around 89 to 90. I was very well uh a student of the Bible. Uh I was I was studying the the Book of Mormon, Doctrine of Covenants. uh all their writings the Joe Smith early church the church history Joe Smith and early church history of his writings um different parts that he's done his lectures as well as Jehovah witnesses and and witness people and all those people as well and even dealing with the uh atheist agnostic all in the early 90s early 2000s you know so I was out there for over 10 years you know and I we were I was part of the whole Bible answer man era in the 80s uh with Walt Dr. Walter Martin who produced a book Kingdom of the Cults where he breaks down all of Mormonism, Joanism, how they're considered a cult and why we believe them to be a cult on their view of God and salvation and so forth. Uh and and Mike has no clue about this, but he brings them on because they he thinks they share the view of God in a sense of just because they both bash the tr they don't believe in the trinity, therefore they have that in common, which is to me comical because that's like me bringing on, you know, I could bring on Jacob Hansen myself and say, let's let's let's just bash unitarianism, how how Jesus cannot be just a man and we both believe he's God. maybe in a different way, but let's just bash Mike in his view of Unitarianism and and we can discuss how ridiculous that sounds and how incomplete and Jacob would agree and he would be talking down on Unitarianism and how they don't have the right view of Jesus. I mean, that is that's why he says it was very comical to me because I, you know, I could bring up Jacob on my show and we can just, you know, destroy Unitarianism together without even touching what we disagree on. Um, and I don't think Mike understands that.
Jacob as an LDS member has the idea at least within the LDS theology in the Book of Mormon, the idea of polytheism, the gods, the plurality of gods. Yes, they can exalt themselves one day to become God themselves. They hope um that uh God of course the father is supreme over Jesus, but he's a god, the Holy Spirit's a god. Uh there's this hierarchy of gods and even before God the father, he had a god who was his father and so on and so on. So, I thought it was interesting because what what I what I think is growing up myself in in that era of the 90s with uh debating Mormonism uh Joe Wes, I thought it was comical that Mike would bring on someone who he would if he understood their theology would would fervently probably make the same type of videos he does on Trinitarians, except more so because they have more theology that goes far out in left field on another planet for that matters. and that that's their whole uh view. It's just completely foreign to what Orthodox Christianity was, even within the early church. So, that's why I said it it's to me it was it's comical that Mike would try to bring on uh Jacob Hansen because he's becoming popular and he thinks they have a common uh agreement on disagreeing with the Trinity. So what?
Like I said, I I could bring on Jacob on my show and we could make fun of Unitarianism and and correct their misunderstanding of what Mike believes and every Unitarian or I could bring a Jo on or even a Hindu person on or Muslim and say, "Hey, let's talk about how unarians, you know, have this weird concept." Now, what I why I say is because they tried to I'm going to play some clips from the from the from their uh view from their interview for their discussion and go over some of the things they were saying. Uh some of the things that are misconceptions uh don't understand the training.
Neither one of them truly understand the trinity and neither one of them don't care to understand the trinity no matter how many times we can explain it to them. But I want to play certain clips.
I want you to see for yourself that this to me it was just comical that Mike who knows nothing about the LDS church. Um and we're going to look at the Book of Mormon. I have the Book of Mormon right here. Dr. Coia Price. I have this I've had this since the '9s. It contains all three uh Book of Mormon and Dr. C. These are all considered scripture to the LDS church. All this is just like the Bible.
This is scripture to them. So, you're going to see what they actually believe about the nature of God or who God is.
Because according like with Mike, if Mike would just read the Book of Mormon, just that alone, and see the passages where they sound trinitarian, but they're not. Of course, they have a three gods uh scenario. Each one was created and came into being. Um, and they do get into that a little bit in the in the interview, but I think it's hilarious because he brings them on because he thinks they have because they have agreement of disagreement with the trinitarian concept, but they're not even in the same ballpark when it comes to their own theology. They're completely foreign. So, let me start with this. I want to start with scripture reading because there was a salvation question that came up towards the end. And of course, um, people think, well, are Unarians saved? Are Mormons saved? And people will say yes or no and or we'll see who knows. In the 90s, Mormons in the 80s and 90s, Mormons, even before that, before even I was born, when Mormonism was being debated um by Christian scholars, they were not considered uh Christians, true Christians. They were considered a cult that that would, you know, you were not saved. You had no salvation in that time frame. So would a Unitarian and so would a Jo considered not saved because of their view. That's not because we say it. Because scripture alone makes a distinction between another Jesus and another gospel. For example, in 2 Corinthians 11, here's what Paul says uh in chap in verse three of uh 2 Corinthians 11. But I'm afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity to Messiah. For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted, you bear you might bear with them or bear this beautifully as far as with them or just go with them. And then he says in verse three and verse 13, for such men are false apostles, deceit for workers and disguise themselves as apostles of Christ. No wonder for even Satan disguises himself or the adversary disguise himself as a messenger of light. Therefore, it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness whom end will be according to their deeds. So LDS has always been put in that category because they have 12 apostles. You know they have another Jesus, another gospel, another spirit, their own interpretation and they have uh you know in our mind deceive themselves. Now, so you got understand there are other Jesuses, other gospels, other ideas of who he is.
And that's why Paul says that they are deceived. Now, he makes a stronger point of the other gospel in Galatians where he says that those who bring another gospel are cursed. That's a strong word.
So in Galatians uh chapter 1 he says I am amazed that you are quickly in verse 6 I'm amazed that you're quickly uh discerning him who called you by the grace of Messiah for for a different gospel which is not another only that there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Messiah. But even if we or a messenger from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to what you have preached to you he is to be accursed as we as as we have said before. So I say again, if any man is preaching to you another go uh you a gospel contrary to what you have received, he is to be accursed or other than we have brought to you. So he mentions the messenger, a messenger, an angel. So it's interesting because the angel Moroni appears to Joseph Smith, shows them where to go find these golden plates that we have no evidence of other than Joseph Smith and a couple of other people who said they saw it. He translates them. Some people say he actually wrote them but translates them and comes the Book of Mormon. Uh so that is their gospel which Paul says another gospel. Uh there's another Jesus and yet here we have another gospel brought by a messenger or an angel of an angel. Uh so I think that was interesting that the parallel there that they would be accursed of God a cursed for those who do those things.
So, and of course this is where we get uh the idea of the the LDS church was never considered a Christian uh you know organization. They were considered a cult in the early 80s and 90s. Uh so when I was out there debating, you know, that was that was the language then.
They were considered a cult. Um and if you were part of that organization and you denied the true you believed in the Jesus of the Mormons or the LDS church, then you were not saved. So, and this is why because of the other gospels, other spirits concept. So, now they're going to get into I'm going to show this clip here because this is a clip where they start to get into Mike talks is going to start talking in in the concept of the trinity uh and why they're going to discuss this ignoring the fact of of the fact that he doesn't even understand what what uh Jacob truly believes in his concept of the nature of God. Uh which we're going to look at in the Book of Mormon. I'm going to read some passages that sound trinitarian and even as oneness would describe God very inconsistent but yet it's the trinity that's so confusing and so you know all this so um so we're going to see this because I think I think it's interesting that we have to find that they have to bring on a he has is he that desperate Mike to bring on a Mormon who is whose uh doctrine sounds more like trinitarian but in a different way because they have three gods three separate gods who had create been created to come into being themselves and exalted the godhood. And yet they're they're going to talk about the trinity. Um and so here's here's a couple comments. Well, here here's Jordan here in the in the comments.
People can't even define the trinity without committing a heresy, but unarians wants to believe it's perfectly clear. First of all, I don't know who you talk to, Jordan, but the trinity is constantly clear if people actually listen, which most unarians don't listen. Most uh people who don't understand the Trinity don't even listen to what it is. Um so again, scholarly consensus all No, you're wrong. Jesus was henotheistic. No, there's there there's not scholarly consensus if and this is the problem I have and you're going to see these comments pop up. Like here's one, right? You know, here's Jordan's comment in there who obviously has no idea what he's talking about because you have different scholars who have different views. you have Christ like if I say Christian scholars as a whole uh who affirm the trinitarian teaching well not those scholars because they're trinitarian so I'm going to look for other scholars who are not trinitarians and most of them aren't even believers in the Bible anyway liberal scholarship uh and we're going to discuss how their consensus matters more than let's say um a true scholar of the Bible from the Christian perspective so this is kind of the ignorance you're going to find from most people who are going to comment here uh because they have no idea what they're talking out and they don't even know the true understanding of what scholarship brings or has and the the differences within scholarship, conservative scholarship, Christian scholarship versus liberal scholarship. Like here, perfect for example, Mike a Unitarian brings on a Mormon LDS member to talk about the Trinity. Um, this is why it's comical.
So they which Mike wouldn't even dare uh discuss this situation as an LDS. I mean it's amazing. Um let me see here. Uh appeared on the Okay, so here's a question comment. Dr. Garza, right before you appeared on the way remnant, I was just then starting to question the trinity and over the past eight or nine months I have listened to 500 hours of trinitarianism. Well, I'm glad I I I I appreciate that comment. We really have to listen to other trinitarian scholars um and look at this and and consider we have you know great scholars Dr. Michael Brown who's a seemetic Jewish scholar on the trinity, Michael Heiser before he passed away. Uh you have others that uh you know Gleon Archer and others I mean Bruce Mezer so many different Greek and Hebrew scholars reffirming the Christian faith throughout all the church history. Um and if you look at the language and all that, we're going to find the truth within the scriptures themselves. So, but let's move back to this because this is where I had a problem like I said because here we have a Mormon and a Unitarian trying to refute the Trinity or talk about it in a way when the Mormon has just as you're going to see has some strange even I'm going to read from the Book of Mormon. I'm going to read from the Book of Mormon so you can see that what I'm saying is is going to sound trinitarian. It's going to sound even like a oneness monarchiness because the Book of Mormon goes all over the place yet it's a trinitarian so they say it's confusing. So let us get into this.
I want everyone to pay attention here where Mike gets started then that I've really got to speak with a Mormon. And we're not really going to dive into like it's not really to put um Mormon theology on the hot sheet on the hot seat like I don't want to like pressure you too much about that even though we can talk about it but specifically the Trinity. So what I think would be a good place to to start is this idea that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all one being. That's one thing that stuck out to me with your conversation on God Logic's channel.
That was something you or on in that debate you emphasized that I thought you explained it very clear. So let's explore that. So what would you say is the biggest problem with saying that Jesus and the father are you know homoius they they have one being.
>> It doesn't make any sense because having your own being is what makes you your own person. as soon as you get into what it means to to what a being is and I think uh and I don't want to get too deep into the philosophical weeds.
Let me just make this point here. Being u trinitarian theology doesn't get into being. We get into essence and nature, the substance or essence and nature of God, not being. So this is already a misconception about trinitarian theology. straw man. Um, trinitarian scholars, trinitarian scholars who have written on the subject talk about the very essence and nature of God. And we always point to the scriptures and we can I can definitely point to a scripture where I wrote a paper on a verse that talks about Jesus who is the very essence and nature of God in the form of uh of the form of Colossians 2:9. Uh, but already they're already off in the wrong start. Being. No, we're not being. It's it's the essence and nature.
So, they can't even get the terminology correct and they're going to go off on being. But, I'm going to read after this from the Book of Mormon. I'm gonna pause it and then read because they're going to try to challenge the Trinity, but yet the Book of Mormon is going to sound just like a trinitarian or even in some cases even like a oneness position. Um, and Jacob has to interpret it differently and say, "Well, let me tell you, it doesn't really mean that." And again, this comes from Joseph Smith who tr supposedly translated the Book of Mormon from these golden plates, which really I don't believe at all. So let let's just continue >> to to some extent. I want to kind of avoid that so the lay person can kind of understand it. But having your own being is what makes you your own person. Okay?
To have your own state of existence.
>> People they use like the rock analogy.
I'm sure you've seen that. They're like, "Well, the rock is zero persons but like one being." But the thing is is that if you had two rocks, you'd have two beings. You'd have two things, right?
Not one thing.
>> Yeah.
>> And so to be your own person is to have your own being. I've And the thing is is if you want to get the philosophical, um my understanding is, and you can correct me if I'm wrong on this, um is that this idea of this, it's the same substance, right? The same being. If I'm not mistaken, a person was an individual substance in the conception of Aristotle. It wasn't that a person was like you could have two persons that were the same substance because a person was an individual substance. So this idea that you have the father, the son, and the holy spirit that are the same being. My biggest problem is is I when I ask them to help me to understand what they're saying, it doesn't make any sense. Ultimately, you end up with three things. Mhm.
>> One of the ways I put it is this. I'll say, "Is a person a thing?" Okay. How many things are there? Do we have If we have three persons, we have three things. We don't have one thing.
>> Yeah.
>> Now, it's funny. Some will say, and I've heard people say this, "Well, God is not a thing."
>> I go I go, "Okay, so God is no thing.
>> He's nothing.
>> He's nothing like it."
again. So you're going to see here what Jacob doesn't want to tell you is that Mormonism, the LDS theology that there are three beings, three gods, polytheism, and they even go beyond that to even go into multiple gods in different ways. So you're going to see they're not going to touch on that. So within trinitarian theology, we still hold to the one God by nature by essence, but yet three distinct persons who share that same nature and substance or essence of God. um within that frame for we say Elohim which is plural, Adonai plural, Yahweh the singular which we have precedents in this in scripture.
So I've already made a number of videos on this from the Old Testament. Um so here we have uh here again Jordan it's not Paul the only worship God the father wrong Jordan they worship morelas worship uh the father son and the spirit. Again I'm going to read from the Book of Mormon again you're going to have some ignorant people in here uh speaking some complete and utter nonsense. I had the Book of Mormon. I've been doing this for over 35 years, 37 years coming up. Uh, and much of that time was in bedded in in studying Mormonism, Joel Wes. So, again, Jordan, please please stop commenting out of ignorance. Please >> isn't a thing.
>> We're atheists now. We just went full circle. Right.
>> Exactly. And I bring that up I'll bring that up to people because they're like, "Well, God is like the essence of being itself and all that." The problem with any of that is that you can't reconcile that with the Jesus of the Bible.
>> Okay? The Jesus of the Bible was a person.
Not only was it a person, it was a human being who had a body. Right? So the the issue is with the Trinity is that it does what what I found as I've dug into it and I tried I really I really have tried to understand the best arguments for it and I keep coming down to what this all amounts to. The Trinity is the biggest emperor has no clothes in human history. Yeah, >> everyone pretends like it makes sense, but as soon as you really start to drill in, the best they can do is throw up sort of word smoke screens and get into nature's and persons and essences and all. And I've looked into all that.
Okay, I've boiled it down and it doesn't make sense. Like for example, I I've I've realized there's always talk about this. I'm sure you've got this a lot.
I've watched a lot of your content as well and I know you get the you're confusing categories >> the nature and the person and it's always conflating categories. So I in my debate with with with Avery I just said well let's just let's get very clear on the categories.
>> So so he says it's it's confusing. He's looked at it. It doesn't make any sense.
Um so let let's read from the Book of Mormon. Let's see what the Book of Mormon says about the nature of God in the Book of Mormon. Um in in 2 Nephi 11:7, for if there be no Christ, there be no God. If there be no God, we are not. For there could have been no creation. But there is a God and he is Christ and he cometh in the fullness fullness of his own time. Okay? So if there be no Christ, there be no God because Christ is God. Let's look at second Nephi uh 31:21. Now behold now and now behold my beloved brethren this is the way and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God. And now behold this is the the doctrine of Christ and the only and true doctrine of the father and of the son and of the holy spirit which is one without end.
Amen. Okay. Sounds trinitarian. Father, son, holy spirit is one. Okay. Sound sounds trinitarian, right? so far. But to to Jacob, this is kind of confusing.
But in his own uh scriptures of the Book of Mormon, here we have it. So, let's move on to the next one.
Let's go on to the next uh verse here.
This is this is where it gets even more so confusing. If you are a Mormon who like Jacob says in uh Mosiah chapter 16 verse1 15, teach them that the redemption cometh through Christ the Lord who is the very eternal father. Amen. So who is Christ the Lord? The very eternal father. Right out of the Book of Mormoniahapter 16 verse1 15. So again father son and holy spirit is one. Uh, Christ the Lord is the very eternal father. Chi, Mike. What does that sound like to you? I mean, do you have a problem with that? Because you guys shake hands because you don't want to sound like the trinity or you disagree with the trinity, but here's Book of Mormon, you know, sounding like the Trinity and then saying that the oneness position almost like that Jesus is the very eternal father. Eternal existing eternally as the father apparently. Um, so again, you have these LDS who are going to try who just love to read this.
And here's what I noticed. Here's what I noticed. Um, here like Jordan, father in the sense that through the atonement, we are resurrected in our spirits. That's not what it says. Again, the the Book of Mormon is clear. And when I've talked to many LDS members in the 90s, they all affirm the what we have talked about in the past about them. It is only the millennial or the new LDS upbringing between and who are now in the late 20s or early 30 mid to late mid to early 30s who have now decided to move away from the actual teachings of Joseph Smith Brigham Young they will either deny what they taught by saying well that's not scripture so if they said it somewhere in a sermon it's not scripture we don't even though it's their own prophets that they call prophets and that they hold the prophets are supposed to be held in every word according to their own teachings history of the church by Joseph Smith. They'll then reinterpret.
They'll deny things that in the 90s and 80s they all affirmed. So again, see here's Jordan. Joseph Smith are not infallible. See, there you go. But yet Joseph Smith and Young spoke in accordance as as as what God had told them and showed them. So if they're not infallible, then the Book of Mormon can can be can is not perfect and neither is the other writing. We can just toss it out if they have a problem. Um because they they even Joseph Smith talked about that to test what he says by the word of God. And if he does if he if what he says is not true then throw it out. Get rid of it. They're infallible. They're not infallible. Right? So these are the prophets who brought forth the Book of Mormon, Doctrine of Covenants, Proate Price, the LDS organization as you see it today. Yet they want you to believe this person here. They're not infallible. Well, what part of it is not infallible? Can you point to me where they're in error? Um where they because they they that they spoke from God. Did the vision that that Joseph Smith had that the father and son appear was that a lie? Because he said all the churches and all the creeds were corrupt and abomination to God and all this. So this is the kind of uh Jordan was probably a millennial it sounds like where they now the new LDS views are now changing.
So when I spoke with Mormons in the 90s personally, they affirmed much of the doctrines that now LDS members are moving away from trying to get out of from especially with teachings like this where Christ the Lord who is the very eternal father. They have to inter well the word father is in reference to this not that he is the father but here is the very eternal father. So now they have to step away which I've had Mormons say he is. In fact, we even get into the Adam God principle in the Doctrine of Covenants, which I'll talk about being Adam God in in the Doctrine of Covenants. Who is Adam in the Doctrine of Covenants? Um, so this is why, yeah, Rivers of Eden, guys with hair loss issue.
See, I'm 29 years old. You proved my point. I was right, Jordan. You're a millennial. You're the ones who are now trying to move away from the true teachings of the LDS church and the Mormons from the early uh into the uh you know 19th century all the way down to the 20th century and now it flips. I knew it that I called them because I grew up talking and debating with LDS and none of this was an issue to them. I mean they held firm to the to the teachings of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young as their prophets spoken of God and even their outside nonsense that they spoke they said well that's a new revelation. It's something that God showed him. It's all this. Now they're trying to deny it and say, "Oh, well, you know, forget it." Um, Rivers of Eden guys with need to wear baseball caps shouldn't be promoting themselves as authorities of the Bible and theology.
I know that's a good cheap shot. Jo, I know. I know. But this is this is where we have the issue again. Mosiah 16, Christ who is verse 15, who Christ the Lord who is the very eternal father.
Now, I'm going to continue to the next one. Uh because again, this is where we get some strange doctrines. Okay. And Alma, let me see here. Alma 11, I believe it is. Uh let me make sure this is right.
Okay. So, here's Alma uh 11. Chapter 11 verse uh 44 it looks like. Yeah, 44. But everything shall be restored to its perfect frame as it is now or in the as it is now or in the body and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar before the bar of Christ the son and God the father and the holy spirit which is one eternal God. Wow. One eternal God. So here again trinitarian language versus Jesus Christ Lord is the very eternal father. Now we have Christ the son, God the father and the holy spirit which is one eternal God. Does that sound trinitarian?
One eternal God.
Okay. Father, Son, Holy Spirit. One eternal God. A trinitarian would say there exists one God who is the father, son, the holy spirit. Same type of language. We define it except Mormonism has polytheism as three separate gods where we put them into as one essence, one nature. That's that's who they are.
Like man and woman was one flesh. The flesh of the nature was one because even though there's two of them, the divine essence and nature of God is eternal which is shared by three distinct persons. Here the Book of Mormon makes that language but they have three gods.
Um no Protestant view not different from the Here's another one from Jordan.
Jordan gets gets to putting these comments in Protestant views that not from Catholic views non-essential doctrines. We differed on the idea because the Catholic church started getting into other areas of idol worshiping with with it they became more of business um and the reformers had to get away from the salvation by works.
We're talking about theology the nature of God the nature of God within traia did not deviate from the Catholic to the Protestants to the reformers. So even with the early church Greek and Latin fathers so not not even the same not even the same not even the same ballpark. Um so baptism required for salvation is not essential doctrine. No, it's not.
Baptism is not essential for salvation.
Uh, sorry about that. Is not. So, now interesting. Okay. So, now we know that within the LDS church, the Book of Mormon, the doctrine which Jacob here is supposed to be here is in Elma again who the father, son, and holy spirit is one eternal God. One eternal God. So again, also let me point this out. That eternal God is a spirit being, not a body of flesh and bone, which I thought was interesting. Um because he is called a he's called a great spirit in the Book of Mormon. Uh and even even even is he an Elma great spirit. Elma 18 uh verse uh 28. And Aman said, "This is God." And Ammon said unto him again, "Believe thou that this great spirit who is God created all things which are in heaven and on earth." So this great spirit being now this this great spirit of the spirit that that God is is mentioned at least I think three times in the Book of Mormon if I'm not mistaken because I have it marked in here too. Yeah. And in Elma and in Elma again uh 22. And the king said, "Is God that great spirit that brought our fathers out of the land of Jerusalem?"
And Aaron said, "Yes, he is that great spirit and he created all things, both heaven and earth. Believeth thou this?"
He said, "Yay, I believe that great spirit created all things." So again, God is a spirit. Who is God according to Book of Mormon? Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one eternal God. Except Jesus is also the eternal father.
Okay. Um, interesting. But again, here's here's the problem.
the in the doctrine of covenants, it is God who has a body of flesh and bones.
The father has a body of flesh and bones. Uh God the father, but yet he's a great spirit. And what does Jesus say at his resurrection in Luke when they thought they saw a ghost? He says they thought they had seen a spirit in the Greek. Jesus said, "Why are you afraid?
Why do you tremble? For a spirit does not have flesh and bone as you see me have." So a spirit doesn't have flesh and bone. The Book of Mormon says God is a spirit. Yet, we're supposed to believe that Joseph Smith and Doctrine of Covenants, which is considered scripture, says that the God the Father has a body of flesh and bone, which they're which Jacob's going to discuss and and even tell Mike the same thing.
So, again, trinitarians have the problem. I see trinitarian language and even oneness, sebellionism in the Book of Mormon as we just saw and even God being a spirit contradicting Joseph Smith and Doctrine of Covenants. So again, who really truly has the problem and who's this confusing? Because Jacob wants to to try to um bring down the trinity when their whole book of their scriptures are have a huge problem.
So here we go.
Here uh here we go again in third Nephi chapter nine. Behold, I am Jesus Christ, the son of God. I created the heavens and the earth and all things that in them are. So now it's Jesus Christ who created all things heaven and earth like the great spirit. I was with the father from the beginning. I am in the father and the father in me and in me hath the father glorified his name. So again now he's with the father. Before he is the eternal father, their one god and now Jesus is saying that he's the one who created the heavens and earth and all things in them. Would would Mike accept that? Because Mike has this guy who has trinitarian oneness theology in the Book of Mormon who that's their that's their that's their doctrine. Um and he says I'm the father is me and glorified.
Okay. So now we have that concept. All right. And then we have another one. Let me see. So here here now remember Jesus is speaking here. I am Jesus Christ the son of God. I created I was in I was with the father and I am in the father.
The father is in me. Okay. Right. Let's go down to uh let's go down to uh ether 3.
Uh verse 14 this again Jesus behold I am he who was prep who has who was prepared I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the world to redeem my people. Behold I am Jesus Christ. I am the father and the son. In me shall all mankind have life and that eternally even they shall receive believe on my name and they shall become my sons and daughters.
Okay. So now who is Jesus? First Jesus says the father's in me. I'm in the father. Earlier it's I that Jesus is the eternal father. Here Jesus is saying that I am the father and the son.
They're the same. Um again is this oneness trinitarian oneness flop back and forth. Um again but you see these people like Jacob wants to say that trinitarians are confusing. We we can't we can't explain the trinity. No. He didn't go on to say that. We can't even come close to it. Yet here's the Book of Mormon who can't even get the simple straight. You have to have an LDS person come and try you to redefine these passages. Well, he's not even though he says even Jesus is saying I am the father and the son. Earlier Jesus who is the eternal father, father and holy spirit are one one God but then Jesus is in the father and he is in him. He created all things. The great spirit created all things. Again you have this mishmash of concepts of trinitarian.
Then we have what is it polytheism because they're all three gods but says one god because they're going to say later in Joseph Smith three gods and then we have this idea of of oneness monarchinism oneness type of ideal seellionism.
You want to talk about confusing this to me is is completely absurd. But yet Mike has Jacob on as if because they both do not accept the trinity.
Oh, they're in agreement. Yet this is a nightmare even for trinitarians to even understand within the Book of Mormon.
Yet Mike is here like their buddies like, "Oh yeah, we we have a common a common theme. We both believe that."
Like I said, I can bring Jacob on my channel and we can talk about the the errors of Unitarianism, the the this the ignorance of it all and how they believe Jesus is the only man. He's not God.
He's not he's not the father either.
He's not God or he's not the one God.
And we could just turn around and bash Unitarianism. And I think Mike would turn around and say, "Well, he's a Mormon. Of course not." But yet they have him on the show as if that supports Mike's view. Is that the best Mike can get? He's that desperate because he didn't even take time to study Mormonism or the LDS church theology about the nature of God. It is even far out there than anybody could expect when you really dig deep into the LDS theology, especially in Doctrine of Covenants and Progate Price, which I'm going to show you where they interpret Genesis as saying, "And the gods created the heavens and the earth. The gods created man, the gods plural, God's plural, God." They actually reinterpret Genesis to say, "Gods, the gods created."
Really, Mike? That's the person you're having on to talk about the Trinity. It only shows both your guys' complete ignorance one on the subject of the trinity and yet you're going to sit here and shake hands and say, "Yeah, I'm happy. Yeah, we both agree on that." Are you kidding me? Are you serious? Like I said, I could bring on a Hindu person who believes in multiple deities and we just talk about unitarism, how how ridiculous it is and how how bad it is.
Really? Really? Uh no, Jordan. Elohim does not mean gods. They don't have an s in Hebrew. Um it's actually a third person. uh third person plural uh when the verb also. So Elohim, you translate it as God, but it's not God. So again, learn Hebrew, learn the suffix, learn how how it should read. That's not exactly what it means as far as the way Mormons teach it. No. Um so again, I guess Jordan probably might be a Mormon.
I'm going to guess he's an LDS person, uh because he obviously is trying to to support LDS theology. Um but you know, he is he is a millennial. So these are the ones who who their own scripture says. I am the father. I am Jesus Christ. I am the father and the son.
Okay. In whom all mankind have life.
Okay. Are they the same person? Because that's what it sounds like when you just read it. Unless you have to have someone like Jacob or an LDS elder come in and say, "Hey, you know, let me try and correct that and and make you understand that they're not." Again, Mormonism is polytheism. They literally have more than one God. Um, who is the council of gods in Psalm uh 82? Good question. It's not gods as in people. It says judges.
In fact, the word is used in the Torah as the judges of Israel as Elohim. These are the ones who give authority over life and death. If you knew the culture, the context, and the language of Jordan, you would understand that that the gods is the judges. That's why he says, "You will die like the men you are." Um, they're corrupting the people. They're not bringing justice. These are judges and men. They're called Elohim like in like in the Torah itself and I believe it's in in Exodus where the judges are given light or maybe Leviticus judges over men's life life and that they given that power like God to judge men. So these are not gods these are judges and that's how the early church that's even how the Jews interpret that passage even in their own commentaries of the Tarum.
So apparently uh again Jordan wants to try and misrepresent the scriptures. He doesn't know the language. He doesn't know the Torah and this is what you get.
All right. Um, so anyway, here's what you got. Again, the LDS church Book of Mormon. Jesus says, "I am the father and the son." But let let's hear some more.
I want to hear some more. You have the who. Then you have the what. What something is, we use words like essence or nature. Okay. Um, or substance. If you ask me what is a substance, well, it's what God is. Okay, cool. And you have the person, father, son, holy spirit. Got it. So when you clarify with people, are you talking about a who or are you talking about a what, they can't play the linguistic games.
>> Mhm.
>> So when dealing with trinitarians, that's the number one thing. Just if you get that clear because they'll jump back and forth between them. And so God when and and the word God, they use it in a bunch of different ways. And you often are very good at pointing out they're equivocating.
Again, I'm I'm laughing because if if Mike would even press Jacob on these passages that I've just read from the Book of Mormon, Jacob would be doing exactly what he's accusing Trinitarians of doing. Well, no, that's this God means this in this way and and let me pull you over here and talk about this and scriptures. Well, no, it's not really God the Father. The Father in this sense means this. And he's he would do exactly what he's accusing the trinitarians of doing. And that's exactly because I know because I said I've talked to them for since the 90s 89 on. I've debated with them. I've had uh Bible studies with them. We've gone over this with them. Uh I've you know many even scholars before like I said who who made life out of you know dealing with Mormonism. Jonases they're on record.
He's accusing the trinitarians of doing the same the ex same thing they would do if Mike would actually press them. If actually Mike actually knew what he believed and say the same thing, he'd be doing the same thing. Jumping around trying to reinterpret what father means, God here, great spirit, this this this and again doctrine and covenants talking about I mentioned before about Adam and Michael.
He goes on to say in doctrine of covenants 20 in section 27 and also with Michael or Adam the father of all the prince of all the ancient of days. Uh again this is talking about how they are uh the ancient of days Adam god theory uh which is in the doctrine of covenants by the way with Michael uh Adam the father of all and the prince of all uh this is how they understood these things u so again uh which I think is interesting because they don't really want to get into that doctrine of co here's one doctrine of covenants 121 verse 28 a time to come and that which nothing shall be withheld, whether there there be one god or many gods, they shall be manifest.
Very two, according to that which was pre uh uh which were ordained in the midst of the council of the eternal god of of all other gods before this world was that should be reserved into finishing the end thereof when every man shall enter into eternal presence and enter eternal rest. So again, council of gods, god of all other gods, the eternal gods over. So now you have gods, polytheism and trinitarians are the ones who are accused of polytheism and confusion, right? But Jacob here in his own doctrine which doctrine of co is considered scripture here. Um thank you rivers of Eden that's exactly right. Uh it's using Elohim as plural.
Yes, this is completely true. Um really Jordan, I just read you Jordan closer to henotheism.
Uh doctrine of covenants 28 contradicts the Book of Mormon. One God, one God, one father, eternal. Here though, doctrines be one God or many gods. They shall be known. Couns uh the council of the eternal God of all other gods before this world was. So again, there's a council of all these other gods. This is polytheism, Jordan, not henotheism and then polytheism. You understand the difference, right? Yes, I do understand difference. Apparently, you don't understand that this is polytheism within the LDS Mormon doctrine. Now, you can deny that. I've never had truly a Mormon in the 80s, 90s who actually denied what I just said. Um, God's the only worship God the Father. Well, again, the Father is Jesus. Jesus is the father, eternal God, holy spirit, all that. Again, I Jordan, you're a millennial. I've talked to Mormons before you were born and they all affirm they worship the father, the son, and the spirit. And they believe kind of what Jacob says, the hierarchy of the father as the god, the son. And in fact, they even which which is astounding. And I don't think Mike understands this.
They actually believe that Jesus and Satan are spirit brothers before creation of the world. And they were spirit brothers in heaven. Okay?
Spiritual brothers. This is affirmed in every Mormon doctrine of the LDS going back. They were spirit brothers.
I mean, and yet we're the ones in this channel that Mike is doing with LDS that we're the ones that have this weird concept of who God is within the trinitarian position when all of LDS doctrine has the Satan spirit brother of Lucif or he's a spirit Jesus is a spirit brother of Lucifer Satan and that this whole creation thing had to take place.
I mean it it's hilarious. And so you have gods. You have Jesus who's God according to LDS in the Book of Mormon, but he's also the eternal father. Holy Spirit, father are one God, great spirit, but yet there's a body somewhere in between there in the Doctrine of Covenants contradicting what a spirit is. Again, this is Mormon theology, but yet I am the one who's going to be uh looked at because this is where I find humorous. And I got to say is they hone in on the doctrine of the trinity yet in their own concept they have much confusion within the nature of God and the LDS thinking. And Mike just consists here like it's not even an issue. Um and here it is. Doctrine of covenants 130. The father has a body of flesh and bone as tangible as man. Verse 22. the son also but the holy spirit has not a body of flesh and bones but is a personage of the spirit is personage of spirit where it is not so the holy holy ghost could not dwell in us so the father and son have a body but the holy spirit does not again according to book of mormon they're one god one god so again um I have to say this is where and let me check this real quick um this is comical to because we see this uh within their own theology of the LDS where talk about confusion. Um talk about what are you talking about because none of this makes sense. Okay, the father is body and flesh but so is Jesus. Now the body the father but he's called the great spirit and Jesus said a spirit does not have flesh and bone which would represent God who is a spirit. Um now let's talk about the gods concept.
Yeah. Well, Jordan, apparently Unitarians don't, but see these two guys, one of them is, I guess, an LDS with you. Yeah, I I can have them up here as well. We could talk about how dumb unitarianism is and and all that, but means nothing. There's no authority here. That's my point. But here, this is speaking of becoming gods. If you read doctrine comes 132:18 on, you'll talk about uh those who will become gods because they have no end.
Therefore, shall be from everlasting to everlasting. They continue, they shall be above all unto him. Then shall they be gods because they have all power and the and the angels are subject unto them. Again, this speaking of exaltation to become a god. So again, exaltation in Dr. Covenants 132, becoming God. Uh again, this is same Mormon doctrine, Mormon theology, which I think is hilarious. Uh I I could just literally just keep going here. I mean, I I have the Book of Mormon right in front of me, and I'm looking at some of these passages. Um and it's amazing.
Yet, here's another one. the book the pearl of great price chapter one yet we talked about the gods right in verse six and I think and I and this is supposedly um and I have a say this is basically a god revealed himself to Moses Moses transfigure confrontation so this is the prize section from the book of Moses verse 6 and I have a work for thee Moses my son that thou art in sim simultative mind only begotten and mine only begotten is and shall be the savior and he is full of grace and truth But there is no god beside me in all things present with me for I know them all. Um so again this is now in creation in chapter 2 in the book of in the ply book of Moses here in creation we have chapter 2 and God and I God said let there be light and I God saw the light and I God called light and day and I God God and I got all these verses 112 and I God singular singular singular all through here. Now, this is why I I laugh because in that account of Genesis, if you go to the book of Abraham, same creation story. It says, "And the God said, and the God said, and the God said, verse 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and the gods, plural, and the gods, and the God." So, you got Moses saying God, and Abraham saying gods.
Um, wow. Uh uh again the gods created which one is it? I mean this is where again and yet we have the problem again.
This is where I think Mike has gone off the rail here to think that we're bringing on Jacob to agree with him about the trinity yet he doesn't even know the the nature of God and the LDS theology. Um because it it it's it's just plain dumb. It's just to me it's the stupidest thing you could do because again I could bring Jacob here to bash on unitarianism.
Would that prove anything to Mike? Well, we we have a common ground. Mike, me and Jacob think that unarianism is a complete farce. What do you think of that?
Who knows? Because you wouldn't even know what to say. But again, this is what we have. So, let me let's continue.
>> And they use the word to refer to a who or they use it to refer to a what. And they jump back and forth all over the place. So, you can't ever pin them.
>> Yeah.
>> But anyone who And again, what what are they doing? It's all just word games.
>> It's all just linguistic confusion to avoid the obvious things that the scriptures teach.
>> Right. Right. Absolutely. What I call it is shell game theology. Right. So you'll have people they want to emphasize that they're really just one God. And then okay, how are they really distinct from each other then if they're just one God?
Oh well, they really are distinct. You know, Jesus really isn't the father.
Okay, well then how are they one God, right? How can they be distinct if they're one? How can they be one if they're distinct? And just back and forth you go be between them. And historically you have many different writers who emphasize on one or the other. That's where we get terms like, you know, Latin. social trinitarianism.
Of course, you have monarchical trinitarianism. And so, a few things that you pointed out I I'll give my thoughts on briefly. So, yeah, you know, I think it's put very well that the big problem with believing that they're one being is that first it just really doesn't make sense. It's sort of counterintuitive to how we understand these even in English. If you look up like the definition of person, it's like a human being. It like appeals to a nature, right?
Okay, more anacronistic examples. Again, um this is just this goes on for almost well, I think it was like two hours, I think it is. I mean, I'm pretty sure, yeah, just over over two over two hours of this whole thing. And yet Mike admits in the beginning he has no idea what the LDS teaches or believes, the concept of God and all that. He touches on a little bit in the middle here and there, uh but he doesn't press him on really anything really severely. He get kind of like, well, I does that seem kind of weird on these issues of salvation or things like that or or pre-existence or they all of course LDS believe they pre-existed in in heaven or before creation with God.
Again, brothers and sisters. Um, yeah, he's paring uh Dale Tuggy on the word person. You're right. Uh, Rivers, it's exactly what he does. Again, it's it's it's a little bit uh disheartening to see. And I laugh because he Mike literally thinks bringing uh I don't even know bringing Jacob on gives credibility to why the Trinity is not true. I mean, or something like that. I mean, I like I said, I could have Jacob on my show or any and we could talk about the the the ridiculousness of Unitarianism and the concept of just being just a man and not God as according to the Book of Mormon and of course uh you know, all those passages I just read. I mean, it's it's it's it's laughable. I mean, it's can Mike do better? I mean, is he that desperate to bring on an LDS Mormon to support his view that the Trinity is false when in the Book of Mormon, it has Trinitarian and oneness language embedded in it and the concept of gods and polytheism and the idea of gods and exaltation of gods. Seriously.
Um, I mean, and again, here's Jordan. This is why I laugh at people like Jordan because Jordan Trinitarians chose to answer why they believe the Bible to be true. I don't know what trinitarians you're talking to. There are many trinitarian scholars who've written on this subject about the authority of scripture. I don't know what planet you're living in the Mormon LDS planet. If you're if you are one, it just sounds like it. But you seriously have don't know what you're talking about. Like I said, I've been doing this longer than you've been born.
Okay? Then both of these men have been around myself and others. Like I said, you have of course you have uh you like I said Gleon Archer and Bruce Mezer who's no longer here and Dr. Michael Brown seatic scholar even uh you know you have uh James White who's been a apologetics all there debating these people um and I can point to so many from the 80s 90s till now. So I've de I've been to the I was at San Diego when the the temple was opened and they had a grand opening and everybody you know they allowed uh everybody to go in and tour it. I was there. I was in line. I went to it. I saw it. I was there firsthand when it opened. You know, I've been around. I've seen this stuff. And the millennials of the LDS are now trying to make excuses for Joseph Smith by saying they're not they're not infallible. They're not perfect. Or Jacob, I think, made a comment one time in another channel that that Joseph Smith was wrong about the concept of polygamy. He was wrong about that. Okay.
Well, again, this is Joseph Smith who is speaking for God at the time, bringing about the Book of Mormon or the, you know, and all these other writing, doctrine, come spoke of Christ bringing as scripture yet and supposedly had this revelation, but now you're going to tell tell the new generation of who what is right and wrong. The apost the Brigham Young of the and the apostles afterward did not believe those things. They affirmed Joseph Smith's teachings and Brigham Young's and all that. It's all in their right. even when they gave lectures and sermons on these ideas and concepts.
Okay. So, it's just this new generation of Mormons and millennials that have a problem now with yet with the LDS, but yet they don't they they stay there for some reason because of the they can't be the more the fellowship aspect of it. Um it's just it's just mindblowing um how this stuff can just be out there. Uh, and people like Mike can have someone like this on his channel and think that that's helping him in some ridiculous way. Uh, so I mean, I'm sorry, but I I I guess Mike is that desperate to get his clicks to get his views up or his uh subscribers up to bring on Jacob because uh they think they they they think they agree that the trend is wrong. But yet in his in the book of Mormon which I've read a number of passages where the trinitarian language and the oneness language is there Jesus says I am the father and I am the son and then it says that they are one god. Jesus is the eternal father. The the father and the holy spirit are one god. God is a great spirit not a body of flesh and bone.
Nowhere will you find in the book of Mormon nowhere where god is described with a body of flesh and bone. He's called a spirit. And Jesus said, "A spirit does not have flesh and bone as he has at the resurrection." So then Joseph Smith comes along and says, "Hey, let me tell you. God has body of flesh and bone. It's old man. So the son, but the spirit doesn't. The Holy Spirit doesn't. But he is the great spirit. The one God who is called the great spirit.
The one God who is the great spirit."
Let that sink in. And again, they have to reinterpret, jump around, and it I mean, it's it's sad. It's comical. Um, it's comical that this is where it has to go because look, I've been around long enough. You know, I I'm someone who if you're going to attack the Christian faith, expect a defense. Joseph Smith started the attack by saying in a vision which is right here in the very end of in Joseph Smith history when he went to inquire he says my object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sex was right that I might know which to join. No sinner therefore did I did I get a possession of myself so that I was able to speak. Then I asked the person as you stood above me in the light which of all the sex was right. For at this time it had never entered in my heart that all were wrong. and which I should join. I was answered that I must join none of them for they were all wrong and per and the personage who addressed me said that all the creeds were an abomination in his sight that those professors were all corrupt. They drew near to me with their lips with their hearts are far from me. They teach for doctrines of the commandments of men having the form of godliness but they deny the power thereof. So the attack comes from Joseph Smith claiming that God told them this and the personages which I see say I saw two personages whose brightness and glory defy all the scriptures standing above me in in the air. One of them spoken to me calling me by my name and said pointing to the other this is my beloved son hear him. So father and son and the son tells him all the creeds all these things corrupt professors abominational creeds. So when the church when the Christian church, the Orthodox Christian church defends itself, we do.
So I grew up in martial arts since I was six years old. Both my parents were martial arts. My mother was a world champion, the first lightweight world women's world champion. My father had a local cable TV show of martial arts called Mar World of Martial Arts and Body Motions in the 70s. I grew up in it. I fought. I competed Brazilian jiu-jitsu in the cage. So when someone attacks me, I'm going to attack back.
I'm going to defend myself and attack back. If you want to come and have a discussion or a conversation in a way that's mature and respectful, I'm down for it. But if you're going to track attack the trinitarian theology with comy comments and snarky remarks and memes sometimes like like Mike does and others. Yeah. Then expect the same in return because some Christians will sit back and let that roll off that they don't like to, you know, defend or or fight back that way. I do. That's the way I was brought up. Like in the streets, if someone comes up to me and tries to hit me, I'm going to defend myself and hit back. Some people wouldn't. Some people just let themselves get hit because they don't know how to fight. They don't have to defend themselves. They just take it and that's it. I'm not one of those people.
So, if you want to come at me with funny comments and memes, I'll come right back at you. Um, that's just what it is. I attack a Mormon. See, here. Here it is.
Right here. Here it is. You attack Mormons, bro. Um, I attack LDS and Mormon theology and doctrine. Joseph Smith laid the gauntlet down, saying what he said that supposedly the father and the son told him, that all of our creeds were an abomination. all the sex are all wrong. So yes, I'm defending the faith of what Joseph Smith said and did bringing about these books right here which are false books. Book of Mormon documents pipas are false gospels read from second Corinthians another Jesus another gospel another spirit.
What did Paul say in Galatians? If he or a messenger an angel from heaven bring another gospel they are cursed of God.
How did this happen? by Angel Moroni telling him where to go to pick out these supposed golden plates. So am I attacking? No, I'm defending my position against Joseph Smith and his false vision of God and his false declaration that all of our creeds and all of our professors were an abomination corrupt.
So no, um this again, these are millennials. They don't know better.
They have no idea what they're talking about half the time and they just want to try to get away a lot of times from actual LDS doctrine and theology and try to reinterpret it. And that's what Jacob does. I've seen Jacob literally back away from LDS theology or try to redefine it in such a way that I've never heard it from any elder in the LDS church who I've spoken to directly graduated from Briging University um in the 80s I believe when I when I did have a show on that topic. Um, so again, this is what we get. You know, the same things. Um, so again, I just want to clarify this. I had to I had to bring this up. I'm not going to go through it.
I just want you to hear the part of the trinity. They go on into other areas as well, but again, it's funny because they they both act like they're in agreement on so much when they are not. I just read you everything as much as I could in a short time. all the different I've read this so many times, gone through it. This is so bad. So many issues with these three books that they call scripture. So many issues. Um I just went through a few of them because they don't want to talk about the trinity.
Yet the trinitarian language and the oneness language is in this as well as well as this god being a spirit without a body which the Book of Mormon does not teach at all. It only comes from Joseph Smith. So again, no such concepts. Um, these are foreign. In fact, let me tell you this. You want to know what the Book of Mormon teaches about color people, people of color? Let me let me show you how Second Nephi 5 says in the introduction. The Nephites sep separate themselves from the Lammonites, keep the law of Moses, and build a temple because of their unbelief. The Lammonites are cursed, received a skin of blackness, and became a scourge unto the Nephites. So these people were cursed with dark skin, black skin, dark skin. And if you continue reading, it goes on from there in chapter 5 still in verse 21. And he had caused the cursing to come upon them.
Yay, even a sore cursing because of their iniquity. For behold, they have hardened their hearts against him, and they had become like unto a flint, a flint. Wherefore, as they were white and exceedingly fair, fair fair and delightful. So white is being fair and delightful in the white skin, that they might not be enticing unto my people, the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come on them again. And a curse shall be the seed of him that mixed with their seed. For they shall be cursed even with the same cursing the Lord speak and it was done. So the cur the blackness of the curse and the seed that progresses from there is dark people, people of color. This is why it was racist for so many years. Mormons had a were were very racist because Book says that people with dark skin, they could not inherit the priesthood. This was early on. Of course, the LDS church reversed all that later on. I don't know if it was in the 70s or even 60s. They finally reversed it and said, "Well, no, we we now changed it. The pro some leader of the church changed it." But the Book of Mormon made it clear that if you were if you were of someone with dark skin, blacken skin or dark skin, you were c that was a sign of a curse from God. So being black was being cursed from God. Um and that's why it says here that the Lammonites and their generations of the sea would have the same curse all the way down. So again, they don't tell you that. Say here in the Book of Mormon, though they don't get away with it. So let me see some of the comments here. Jesus, Jesus is God.
Uh here's here's an ignorant statement again by Jordan. Jesus has a body. Jesus is God. But God does not have a body, right? Oh my goodness. I don't know how Jordan even I mean I feel sorry for Jordan. Apparently Jesus at the resurrection has a glorified spiritual body. Resurrected glorified spiritual body. Yes. He is God who is resurrected. He is the Elohim second person. The word here it is God does not have a body. Right? God is a great spirit. According to the Book of Mormon, God is a great spirit. What is a spirit?
Does a spirit have a a flesh and bone?
No. Jesus said, "Why are you think you've seen a ghost of himself after the resurrection? For a spirit does not have a body of flesh and bone." So Jesus when he received his glorified body made a point that spirits do not have a body of flesh and bone. The Book of Mormons says in the in the which I just read that God is a great spirit. A great spirit. And then it confuses the father and the god father and Jesus as being the same god, eternal god, Jesus the father, the father as the son. All this nonsense you have in the book of Mormon. They can't even get their own doc. Joseph Smith couldn't even get his own theology correct about who God is. He was all over the place in the Book of Mormon.
Jesus is a very eternal father. Fathers and holy spirit are one God. Uh but Jesus says, "I am the father and the father is the son. I am the father. The father is the son. We are one. We are great spirit." I mean all this language change um is kind of you want to talk about confusing that is confusing. So this to me and I'll bring this down is tremendously heart-wrenching to hear these type of people discuss the trinity when neither one of them are even in the same ballp theology. Um uh um here's another here's here's here's the wax in Jordan's ears. You just committed a heresy by saying Jesus resurrected without a physical body. A spiritual body. A spiritual body. That's what Paul talk a Jewish res. I mean this is this is this is where I mean Jordan has two by twos in his ears. I said he was resurrected in a glorified spiritual body that has flesh that can eat. The father does not. Neither does the Holy Spirit. They are God is spirit and that sense Jesus. And if you knew about the what a resurrection means in Jewish theology, you would know that in Jewish theology, the body at the resurrection, there is a spiritual glorified body. 1 Corinthians 15. That's what it is. Oh my goodness. Again, Jordan seriously has issues. Heresy. Because he doesn't get the wax out of his ears. He can't hear what I'm saying. Jesus was resurrected in a spiritual glorified body, not as a spirit.
So again, ignorance. Complete ignorance.
Um he says, "If Jacob didn't stop by Mike's live while Mike was reviewing that debate between Jacob and Gothic, I don't think Mike would have had Jacob on."
That's possible. I mean, I don't know.
But here's the interesting part. Mike has a Book of Mormon. All he has to do is look up Mormon theology about the nature of God, what they believe, go to I mean, he loves he loves AI, right?
Chat, whatever. Grock, he could have just said, "How do the Mormons view God?" You know, nature of God, is it, you know, where in the Book of Mormon? I mean, he could have easily done this before uh because he had planned this out. So the fact that he did no homework on this, zero homework and brought him on is what is really comical to me to discuss a subject like the trinity when Jacob is completely in a whole different uh world when it comes to the nature of God. gods plural polytheism planets exaltation of gods can't get whether the father the son are the same god or not Jesus is the father father is the son eternal all this nonsense you see within the Mormon doctrine but yet trinitarians who are consistent on their understanding of the essence and nature of god Mormons are way out in left field and yet we're the ones who are confusing I just read you from the very beginning all the different verses which we can go back and look at from from the book of Mormon of the confusion within the nature of God very disturbing Uh let me see here. But but Jacob was in the live chat during that show and I think that's what I invite him on. No, he said I don't know because he said uh he had uh Chris, he said he he had planned he's been waiting for this that this was this was something that was planned and ready to happen. Um that this this discussion um if you read if you go through the interview, he talks about that and I believe because I remember watching this today and live and I went back and they said yeah that they had planned on this. He's been looking forward to having him on ever since he's been seeing him doing his Jacob doing his debates. So again, I don't think so.
Um, man, Mike is on a pedestal now with naive, so he's beginning to think he knows it all. Yeah, I know. The problem I have is even recently I watched Mike try to use again BDAG against uh his debate against Eli. Oh my gosh. I mean, Eli didn't have it. So Mike is like, "You need to learn how to read the lexagon. you need to learn how to have one. And you know, and Mike is over here abusing the lexicon himself. He abused it in that debate. I mean, and even when Eli tried to call him out on it, it was it was laughable that Mike tried to defend it and says, "Oh, you need to get a lexicon. You don't yet." Mike doesn't even know how to read a lexicon. And still doesn't know how to read it, by the way. He still doesn't. He's not He's not fooling anybody. He really thinks he has some kind of authority in what he says because he he reads uh Unitarian books and non-Christian scholars. He even he even references his uh Dan Mlullen and his book. I mean I'm like are you kidding me? You are now looking and reading Dan Mlullen's book who rejects Jesus, rejects the Bible as a whole, doesn't even believe Moses existed, looks at the data and says or you know what Jesus said or didn't. I mean, Dan is a liberal scholar, a liberal biblical scholar who's following liberal scholarship for his data and and doesn't even believe uh in the the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament, nothing. And yet, Mike references him as an authority. This is sometimes what Unitarians do. Not all, a lot of them do. They will look at non-Christian liberal scholar sources, Bartman, D Mlullen, other people, and then cite them as authority because they don't they don't have anybody else who even agrees with them with the New Testament.
Jesus is the Messiah. None of that. Or they'll cite uh Jewish sources that are anti-Christian.
Um, I mean, this is why I think it's very comical because that's most of the time their go-to position and now they'll go to Dale Tuggy or, you know, um, the other gentleman. Lift on my head for a second. Uh, the other Unitarian scholar, um, uh, shoot, what was his name? We have Dale, we have Tuggy, and then we have, um, the other gentleman who just debated, James White. And I'm getting old. I'm losing it right here with my mind trying to remember. Um, uh, shoot, help me out here, Rivers. Uh, you guys, you know, he has debated James White. Um, gosh, I hate when that happens. Uh, Dustin Smith, sorry, Dustin Dustin Smith. So, Douggee and Smith are their go-to scholars now for the most part. And then Dan Mlan as well because he wrote a book on the image the the image of God type book concept of um you know I I have Dan's book because I I I like reading people people like that because I want to see where they're where they're coming from. I don't want to I won't quote them. I won't reference them as an authority in my in my position. Not at all. Um, but again, this is why I said if this is what you're going to get now because unarians like Mike Mike like Mike, not all unitarians, but like Mike and others similar to him are desperate to get people on there who disagree with the trinity and they're and they get people like this eldest Mormon who I don't know if Mike would have known that what they really believe in the Book of Mormon about God, how trinitarian this sound and even oneness it sounds where Jesus says I am the father and the father is the son and we're and they're the same eternal God and they're holy they're all one God father and holy spirit um I don't know I mean eventually in this whole discussion Jacob does tell him about the pre-existent world and all that and Mike doesn't wow that's a red flag it's yeah but he doesn't press him he doesn't challenge him like like he does trinitarians he doesn't get down on him and and talk about all these things like he does against trinitarians he he's more he's more mature poor and polite to to to Jacob. Uh but again, Jacob's view of the nature of God based in the Book of Mormon is definitely an completely another world, completely confusing and and for them to even discuss it with the Trinitarian position is hilarious. So, um I don't think I don't know, River. I think Mike is fairly humble. Look, Mike can be semi-humble depending who he's talking to, but when he he when he's making his uh videos, he really talks down to people as as if he has authority in his in his positions. Um, so I mean, to me, it's it's ridiculous. Um, here's the question. If I had to team up with Unitarians, Mormons, which would you choose? Neither. Neither. That's an a that's a fallacy. A either or a fallacy. That's called an either force, either or fallacy, Jordan, because I would choose neither. I have many good Christian scholars out there who I would team up with if I had to outnumber the Unitarians in the in the areas of the LDS as well. So, no, I would choose neither one. Um, so even even Mike's understanding of the body, soul, and spirit is corrupted. Uh, he tries to get into that and he equates the spirit and the soul is almost the same. He doesn't even know the difference between the the the ruach, the nephesh. Of course, bas uh the soul and the flesh. He doesn't know the difference between the ruach and the nephesh and the basar uh the spirit, the soul and the and the flesh or the the of the body. He doesn't know the difference. He equates them. He thinks that when you die, you cease to exist. Completely absurd. Uh he he equates death and the body sleeping to the ground as if that's speaking of also the spirit. Does not. Um, so again, this is this is where Mike doesn't know the Hebrew. He doesn't know the distinctions. He doesn't know the difference between a body, soul, and spirit in Hebrew in the Old Testament and how it's used in Jewish mindset as well as the second temple. He thinks that when you die, that's it. So again, another false doctrine within the Unitarian position of Mike.
I would team up, let me see. I would team up with a unitarian because they are are like Christians who don't use the Book of Mormon. Yeah, I I but Rivers remember you consider yourself a Unitarian in a sense. So they're kind of in your in your same field. So you would team up the Unarians. I would I would team up with Trinitarians. I would I would and if I had to choose, I wouldn't choose really any of them because again it there's there there is a great divide amongst the nature of God. As I said before in scripture, there are other Jesuses, other gospels and other spirits. And those who preach another gospel or another spirit could be cursed of God are deceived. Uh even the even the adversary, Satan has false apostles, false deceitful workmen, all that. So the scriptures talk about other Jesuses and other gospels and the cursings of those. So yes, it it does. Um I understand, but trarians were given an option. That's true.
Yeah, I guess I guess that's that's pretty correct. Um, but yeah, that that's how I would view it. I mean, that's how I look at it. But again, I just wanted to touch on this very beginning part. I don't I'm not going to the whole whole thing. Um, you I have a link down below. You can watch the whole thing yourself. You can see where they start getting into other areas of theology. Uh, but this whole thing starts by having a unity within denying the Trinity, which is laughable when you read the Book of Mormon. And it's trinitarian language. It's oneness language. It's it's all over the place.
doesn't even know who God is and then it changes from God is spirit to God is flesh and bone. Um and then that the father and the son are the same person.
So it makes no sense. You need an LDS hat, I guess, on your head to try and figure it out. Millennials like to distance themselves from from Joseph Smith doctrine and theology. I noticed that nowadays because I've talked to recent current millennial LDS members and they will say like this other gentleman said, Jordan, oh they're not in they're not infallible. they have issues and or like Jacob, oh well he was wrong about this teaching and okay well that's great but back in that day they were not wrong they were men of God prophets of God spoke and they listened the teachings and their doctrines were correct according to them and even they even said so they even said that their own doctrinal words should be held and listened to as scripture and authority.
So God is spirit. Again, here it is. God is spirit and flesh.
God the Father has a body of flesh and bone as tangible as man. The Holy Spirit doesn't because he's just a spirit. So make that make sense. But yet God the Father is also spirit. Uh you can't have both a my both ways, my friend. You have the great spirit in the Book of Mormon.
I here what I would ask Jordan, show me anywhere in the Book of Mormon. Just give me give me a section in the Book of Mormon where God is described as having a body anywhere anywhere as a body especially a body of flesh and bone because all you're going to see is great spirit, great spirit, great spirit. Then you're going to see that Jesus is the father and the father is Jesus. They're the same person. And that Jesus is the eternal father, the eternal father.
Eternal or the father, son, and holy spirit are the eternal one God. Again, this is what you get from a millennial, a millennial LDS. Seriously, no. No. No Gen X or baby boomer LDS would dare agree with this person. Not not one that I have ever spoke to. No one has ever said God is spirit and flesh. They'll distinguish Jesus as being the resurrected spiritual glorified body.
And now the body, the father also has a body, physical body of flesh and bone.
There's no spirit. It's just the Holy Spirit that does that. He's only He's the only one that's just a spirit, but the other two are flesh and bone. There you go. Um, so, so I don't know any serious uh, baby boomer, Gen X that I've spoken to would agree with with Jordan's millennial new views. These are all new views, by the way, because a lot of what Jacob says, not a lot, but quite a bit when they're trying to reinterpret things and get away from Joseph Smith and Brigham. Young and a lot of their teachings, um, and really try to get away from them because they're being used against them. Um, try to hold on to these concepts of new way of thinking within within the new generation. um it's not going to work because again that's that I mean you you got to be consistent especially if you're following Joseph Smith and and and your whole your whole salvation or your whole premise of exaltation depends on Jo whether Joseph Smith really saw God the father and the son really was visited by the angel Moroni to find these golden plates. your whole thing survived that.
And then about the polygamy and the dark skull curses of of of where the black race comes from and the spirit brother of Lucifer that Jesus and him are the spirit brothers together. Yeah, Jesus is the creator of all things in heaven and earth. Created everything in heaven and on earth, but yet their spirit I mean this is absurd. It really is. You want to talk about confusing? This is why they were considered a cult. And they're still considered a cult by many Christians, including myself, in the sense that they're gonna have to face the true God of Israel, the true God of the scriptures about this. And this is where it becomes really a problem. Um, so exactly and and Rivers, you're right.
He's called he's even called the invisible God. God from God, all the invisible God, you know, can't be seen, all this stuff. Um, yeah. Impossible to see. Again, this is what I'm saying. It's it's you even have these verses that talk about God that way. The father is in this way. Uh but yet Jose Joseph Smith was the only one to be able to see him. But they have a body of flesh and bone. Holy Spirit doesn't. Um so again, here's Jordan again. You said baptismation and this nuction. That's right. That's what scriptures teaches. That's what second temple Judaism uh was consisted of. Bapt water baptism was not essential for salvation. Um it was a command and obedience to show your death, buried, resurrection with the Messiah. But it's not was not looked at as being essential. So no, it wasn't.
Uh more Jordan here. Jordan's funny. I think Christian hasn't evolved that over years as well. We've been consistent.
Our theology has been the same. Sorry, Jordan. We have consistent theology even with going back to the early church fathers, the Greek, Latin fathers of the Trinity, the nature of God, and so forth. For us, and even in the New Testament, in the Old, it's been consistent. We haven't changed our theology. We didn't have to have God appear to somebody and say, "They're corrupt. their creeds are an abomination. That means all those doctrines are wrong. All the professions are We didn't have to have that. It's been consistent whether there's been disputes within the church on non-essential issues, whether I said whether it's tithing or how things are done with salvation or with works and and the reformers, but the essential doctrines of who God is by nature and Jesus has never changed. Never changed once.
So, sorry about that, but that's wrong.
The water baptism were by immersion or some other way. Uh it was immersion. The the Hebrew for baptism in the mikvah was always for immersion because when they would go to cleanse themselves to go to the temple, they would immerse themselves fully by the body, cleanse themselves and then go up. So the cleansing of immersion was always consistent with second temple temple Judaisms and the mikvah and how they presented themselves before the temple for sacrifice and even in baptism.
Jordan, you gave no example of inconsistent theology. All you've gotten given is your your lack of understanding, your very lack of understanding of Christian theology, orthodoxy that we go back further. Like I said, I've been doing this longer than you've been around. I have many, many scholarly books on my shelf from many Christian scholars throughout the centur history of the Christian churches, all the volumes. I'm very well aware of it.
Sorry, Jordan, you don't know what you're talking about. I'm sorry that you have to have the millennial mindset and LDS and think it's something different.
It's not.
Uh no uh rivers I mean the mikvah as far as how the baptism immersion process was baptizing John would have been baptizing him as was been understood traditionally as the cleansing process would have been a full immersion as the cleansing. Um again Jordan's Jordan's debating over non-essential issues. I mean consensual if you believe in baptism but even then Catholics had a this is where Jordan doesn't have an understanding of early church history. There was the Catholic church and even early church who had an essentialist to baptism. But they also had an out where some some of the early church uh fathers taught that you can wait a year to get baptized, get trained, but if you died during that time without baptism, you're still saved. Or if you died right before, but you had a heart for God, you're still saved. So there was always an out for if you died before baptism as a believer.
And so they they labeled that as essential to show your faith and even to show your salvation. But they always had an out saying, "Oh, well, but if you die beforehand, you're saved. Don't worry about it." So that makes baptism non-essential. And the early church fathers in different areas, which I have a book on, shows how they had different views of baptism of of when you should get baptized, how you should get baptized and all that and washing, bathing in scripture. Um, it it's it's the same concept. That's what Paul talks about I believe and even in first in the Romans uh rivers um the distinction between the baptism or washings uh the the baptism signaling now with the within this within after the resurrection of symbolizing death burial resurrection but before it was cleansing and washing in the water coming up and out to get ritually clean with after the resurrection it was formulated I know baptism is not a word in the Bible in the Hebrew or Greek as far as the that word um it's an English translation obviously, but the immersion the immersion of of within the Greek and Hebrew context is where I would I'd fall on.
Um, yeah. And then they get rebaptized.
Um, but if the baby died before he was baptized, they would say he's still saved. So there goes your theory. Uh, read the early church. If the b if the baby had had passed before baptism, uh, he'd still be considered saved. Um, so there was a time frame for that too. So again, as these are these are these are in-house debates within the church. But again, um, it just depends on where you lie within your theology. But again, off the subject, and I don't want to get into this too much, Rivers, because it's I I'll speak to you off on this. Uh, I'll pull it up for you and send it to you.
But the whole concept of this was dealing with the Mormon concept of the Trinity, uh, the LDS there, Jacob, and of course with Mike, who uh had no idea what he what he was talking about by bringing on Jacob when Jacob's own Book of Mormon and Dr. Covenants uh align more with the Trinitarian language and even the oneness language and even even denies it with other teachings of God's polytheism and all this other areas. So very inconsistent. You have one God, one God in the Book of Mormon, great spirit, then they're both the same. Father, Son, Spirit, all the same. Father's the son, the son, the spirit, blah blah blah. The father is the son, the son of the father. Then all of a sudden you have gods who created the heavens and the earth. Gods that Moses is god singular again inconsistently the exaltation of becoming gods. I mean it's a headache to even go through it. It's actually mind-blowing. But no rivers I'll get with you on that because I don't want to be in here too much longer. So again watch the whole discussion yourself. Um it's comical to me as a trinitarian and so you'll see for yourself that this this is just really sad. But anyway um I'll stop right now cuz I don't want to go watch you any further. I've been on here longer than I would want to plan to. Uh but again, um look at the whole whole discussion yourself.
Again, the desperation of Mike to to have somebody on who thinks he agrees with them on on the Trinity. Yet the LDS has a far different view of God than Mike even realizes. Even even to me, worse than Trinitarian theology. But again, that's just how it is. God bless Jordan. Appreciate the time, your questions. I know we're not going to agree on everything. Thanks, River, for joining in. If you guys have any questions or comments, leave them here.
I'll try to get to you. If please subscribe, like, share. We can uh I'll go on live again in the future. Got some things coming up. So again, thank you for tuning in. Uh hope to see you guys soon and God bless.
>> Bible Answers with Dr. Al Garza.
Related Videos
BSA Goldstar - I gave up! And why animals beat humans!
thebingleywheeler
102 views•2026-05-31
The 'Islamic dilemma': Quran tells Christians to judge by the Gospel
canceledkings
1K views•2026-05-29
3 Dreams That Changed Philosophy Forever
mommyplus24
731 views•2026-05-31
Seneca - Escape The Crowd, Find Your Inner Peace!
realfreewisdom
114 views•2026-05-29
Scholar Explains: WHAT IS A GNOSTIC?
fightbackpodcast
965 views•2026-05-31
Fulton Sheen: A Mente Tenta se Manter Jovem para não Sofrer com os Impactos do Tempo
SantoCotidiano-port
673 views•2026-05-29
Why Pure HEDONISM Is IRRATIONAL
qnaline
12K views•2026-05-31
When They Ignore You, Do This Instead | Stoicism
ZenithWisdom-e3k
615 views•2026-05-31
