Evolution Proves God’s Existence

Image result for augustine

William Lane Craig rightfully points out that Catholic scholar, St. Augustine of Hippo who lived from 354-430, articulated that creation wasn’t necessarily 6000 years ago.  Neither did Augustine required special creation with God “poofing” Adam into existence. This flexible conception of creation arose well before Science revealed the age of the earth and universe.

Image result for special creation

Without intervention by God, Craig argues life wouldn’t have arisen.  Life simply would have been so improbable the Earth would have first been swallowed up by our dying Sun before life would have had a chance to develop.

Image result for sun life cycle

Latter-day Saints don’t believe in creation ex nihilo.  We believe in eternal matter and eternal spirits.  We believe God is the father of our spirits.   When men developed from their ancestors, at this point God may have given the first humans their spirits.

We simply don’t know how God was involved.  We welcome findings of scientists that demonstrate what occurred.  But we should all recognize there are limits to what Science can tell us.  We don’t need to adopt Scientism.  Instead, we should marry the best of Science and our faith.

 

Aristotle and his impact on Christian theology

If you understand Aristotle’s views on God, metaphysics, philosophy, and the cosmos you’ll better understand Christianity.  Specifically, you’ll better understand the doctrine of the Trinity, why Christians had the false interpretation of the cosmos (geocentric) for 1500 years, and other errors that were incorporated into a Christian world view.

Image result for greek tutors in ancient rome

After all, Greek thinking spread into the Roman world when the Romans conquered Greece.  Roman leaders had Greek slaves teach them and their kids mathematics, philosophy, astronomy, and all other areas of knowledge.

Image result for language of christianity at time of christ

After Jesus’ resurrection, Christianity spread into a Greek world.  One that believed in things just the way Aristotle did centuries before.  Eventually, Roman leaders persecuted Christians who believed in ideas contrary to the accepted Greek views.

Image result for roman persecution of christians

Jews and Romans labeled Christians polytheists for belief in 2 Gods (Father & Son).  This persecution continued on and off until Christians embraces Greek philosophy, defining God and Jesus being one (2 persons, but one being) and of the same substance.

Image result for greek medicine

Greek medicine has been largely rejected.  So has Greek astronomy.  A Greek view on God’s nature has persisted, however.

Aristotle had many brilliant ideas for his day.  He debated non-believers and laid out proofs for God’s existence.  Aristotle had a theory for nearly everything.  He was correct on many things, but mistaken on many others (including theological, medical, and astronomical concepts).

Many of these errors were adopted without reservation by the educated and a very significant institution:  the Roman Catholic Church.  Nobody at the time conceived the Greeks were wrong.  Indeed, these ideas were held up and propagated for centuries.  These false ideas — geocentricism, Greek medicine, and others — were not rejected till the Scientific Revolution.

A short  12-minute summary:

From Christian Wheaton College.  This is very dry.   Joseph Smith makes it much simpler.  He saw two resurrected beings.

More detail:

 

LDS scholar, Barry Bickmore, discusses the transformation of the Hebrew/Jewish organization into a more Hellenized version of Christianity:

Is Faith Compatible with Reason?

Great podcast!  Faith is reasonable.  And is a choice.

Abstract: In this article I argue that faith is not only rationally justifiable but also inescapable simply because our decisions regarding ultimate questions must necessarily be made under conditions of objective uncertainty. I review remarks by several prominent thinkers on the subject — both avowed atheists and several writers who have addressed the challenge implicit in issues related to faith and reason. I end my discussion by citing William James, who articulated clearly the choices we must make in addressing these “ultimate questions.”

Is Faith Compatible with Reason?

Peterson likely used notes from this talk in this debate with Michael Shermer.  Many of his points and some stories appear identical:

Removing Greek Philosophy from Christianity

The Trinity is neither implicit nor explicit in the Bible.  Triune, triunity, or similar words and concepts are never mentioned or referenced in the Bible.  They’re not Hebrew concepts.  They’re completely Greek in nature.

Image result for greek philosophers

This Christian (not LDS) leader, Joel Hemphill, summarizes this way:

“Scripture, Plato,  Aristotle played perhaps equal roles in developing Trinitarian views and Trinitarian doctrine.”

Mr. Hemphill was a pastor for decades before determining in 2005 that the Trinity was not true.  Though we don’t agree on his concepts relative to Jesus (Joel feels Jesus isn’t divine), Joel does speak the truth about the Trinity and Greek philosophy.

He continues in the video below:

“It was from these (Greek) foreign sources, not Jesus himself, that the doctrine of the Trinity, the incarnation, and related conceptions grew.

We have also observed that the specific metaphysical vehicle used to express the classical doctrine of the Trinity was a Greek metaphysics that was viable in that time, but no longer makes a great deal of sense to most people today…”

The speaker and the attendees understood the implication:  their concept of God was corrupted.

Like LDS people, Unitarians don’t believe in the Trinity.  This Unitarian in the video below makes solid points.

In contrast to this speaker, however, LDS folks believe Jehovah was a pre-existent Jesus.  Unitarians think God the Father was Jehovah and is/was the only God.

Though we disagree on many points, this person still makes valuable points about the Trinity.

This third video is another Christian (Unitarian) speaker.  Again, not a Latter-day Saint.   His talk is entitled, “The Five Major Problems With the Trinity.”  He provides more detail than the 2nd video above.

Latter-day Saints don’t agree with everything a Unitarian does or we would join their faith.  But we can relate and accept their position relative to the Trinity.

  1. Jesus was a Jew who believed as other Jews.  Jews didn’t believe in the Trinity.   ***  speaker quotes Deut 4:35, which LDS people interpret differently                       –  not a declaration of absolutely no other God or deity, but one of greatness   –  similar to Isaiah 47:8:  “besides me (Babylon) there is no other” (fall of Babylon predicted; other cities existed, but Babylon was being praised as great
  2. The Trinity is never explained.  A priori assumptions allow for some pulling together here and there, but the Trinity is never explained as a principle.
  3. No Jew who converted to Christianity ever challenged the Trinity (lack of controversy).
  4. God is always addressed using singular personal pronouns (you).  God is always spoken of using singular personal pronouns (he).  God almost always speaks using singular personal pronouns (except the four “us” texts when God is including others in an action; and when God speaks to angels and heavenly councils)
  5. Jesus is not all-knowing.  Jesus didn’t know “that day or hour” in Mark 13:32.

Bart is an atheist, but an outstanding scholar:

 

Brigham Young: Pitman Shorthand, Journal of Discourses, Adam-God Theory, and the Priesthood Ban

Helpful podcast:

Episode 22: In Brigham Young’s Words – Gerrit Dirkmaat and LaJean Carruth

Key points:

“First, Russell Stevenson interviews Gerrit Dirkmaat about the research he and LaJean Carruth did comparing the shorthand notes of George Watt to some of the speeches in the Journal of Discourses.

The Journal of Discourses have historical and religious value, but Dirkmaat urges members to be careful quoting specific passages and to realize that in most cases, there is no way to know the specific words used.

Image result for journal of discourses

LaJean Purcell Carruth has an unusual skill: she can read the shorthand of George Watt, the transcriber of the speeches contained in the Journal of Discourses, his private printing venture.

Over the past thirty years, she has learned his distinctive style–the unique upturns and curves he made in his notations. As she transcribed his notes, she noticed that they varied — sometimes greatly — from the printed versions of the same speeches. She wrote a poem about what she noticed:

There was a man named George Watt,

Who could improve Brigham Young, so he thought.

So he took out words here,

And he added words there,

And his accuracy was not what it ought.

LaJean Purcell Carruth©

Image result for LaJean Purcell Carruth

LaJean expounds on what she has learned about the speaking styles of early religious leaders. They spoke extemporaneously and without notes and were more prone to engage in speculative theology than current leaders.

She emphasizes that Brigham Young was a powerful speaker. He cared about the people, and they knew that he cared about them. When George Watt changed Brigham Young’s words, he changed what Brigham Young said about himself. She feels the real Brigham Young has been lost to us as we view him through his discourses printed in the Journal of Discourses.

Image result for LaJean Purcell Carruth

In her research, she discovered that the “one drop [of Negro blood]” phrase attributed to Brigham Young by Wilford Woodruff did not exist in the original shorthand transcription of George Watt on a speech relating to the priesthood and temple ban.”

Watt took good notes.  The issues are found during the review process.  What was published wasn’t identical to what Watt wrote down.

A few more helpful podcasts:

Creeds (and the Trinity) in Christianity

Image result for lds godhead

 

Elder Holland discusses the LDS doctrine of the Godhead here:

Wikipedia lists the many creeds and highlights the important historical ones here.

The creeds evolved over centuries.  From the Apostles’ Creed (180 AD) to the Athanasian Creed (500 AD).  Latter-day Saints can agree with the early creeds.  The later creeds, however, are deeply influenced by the dominant (at the time) Greek philosophy.

The creed in 180 AD is simple and clear.  The creed in 500 AD is not clear.  Not simple.

Mormons believe in the revealed truth about the Godhead.

Apostles’ Creed:

I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, God’s only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried; he descended into hell.

On the third day he rose again; he ascended into heaven, he is seated at the right hand of the Father, and he will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.

Athanasian Creed:

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled; without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the Persons; nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite. So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity; to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion; to say, There are three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid; the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, let him thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Substance [Essence] of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Substance [Essence] of his Mother, born in the world. Perfect God; and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father as touching his Manhood. Who although he is God and Man; yet he is not two, but one Christ. One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh; but by assumption of the Manhood into God. One altogether; not by confusion of Substance [Essence]; but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man; so God and Man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation; descended into hell; rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty, from whence he will come to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies; And shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire. This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved.

Image result for stanford

From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, History of Trinitarian Doctrines:

Very first paragraph:

“This supplementary document discusses the history of Trinity theories. Although early Christian theologians speculated in many ways on the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, no one clearly and fully asserted the doctrine of the Trinity as explained at the top of the main entry until around the end of the so-called Arian Controversy. (See 3.2 below and section 3.1 of the supplementary document on unitarianism.)

Nonetheless, proponents of such theories always claim them to be in some sense founded on, or at least illustrated by, biblical texts.

 

David Paulsen focuses on  the LDS understanding of God.   He explains that Origin, Augustine (though reluctantly), early Christians, and Jews that God believed was corporeal.   This is not a Trinitarian view.

Blake Ostler has written extensively on this topic.  Fortunately, he created easy-to-listen-to podcasts on the topic here:

A short essay by Blake Ostler:  The Logical Incoherence of Traditional Christianity.

Kerry Shirts always provides fun, enlightening insight:

 

Atheism, not God, is an Illusion

First, some perspectives from the 3 Mormons:

John Lennox is a master.

Lennox mentions world-famous atheist, Richard Dawkins, around the 3:45 mark.  Dawkins best-selling books is “The God Delusion.”

Lennox draws on experts in psychiatry who shares all the benefits of belief in God.  Atheism, in John’s estimation, is the illusion.

Evidence for God and What about the “New” Atheists?

The wonderful 3 Mormons:

 

Related image

Let’s start with this series of short, 5-minute videos from Prager University. 21 videos total are available in Prager’s Religion/Philosophy section.  Consider subscribing to this YouTube channel.

Dennis Mark Prager is an American conservative and nationally syndicated radio talk show host, columnist, author, and public speaker.

He’s also a believing Jew.  Of course, LDS people don’t share all specific beliefs with Dennis.  However, we do have much in common.  Including most of the following beliefs about God, evil, morality, free will, etc.

 

Blake Ostler, an LDS attorney and philosopher, shares many of his insights relative to the nature of God in over 20 podcasts found here at “Exploring Mormon Thought”.

One is linked below.  Please review all his others.  They’re awesome and insightful!

Ostler explains how one can know truth from spiritual experiences:

 

Alvin Plantinga, perhaps the world’s leading religious philosopher, discusses the position that all religions can’t logically be simultaneously true.  Alvin is not LDS.

John Lennox articulates the differences between faiths, especially between the 3 major monotheistic religions.

Judaism believes Jesus died, but didn’t rise.  Islam believes Jesus didn’t die.  And Christianity believes Jesus both died and rose.  1 of these 3 (or none) is correct.  All 3 are not correct.

Thoughtful Ravi discusses why he believes Christianity is the true faith.

Ravi is great in a question-and-answer format:

New Atheism

In my experience, the climate today with strident new atheists makes people who leave faith feel more supported, trendy, and smarter. It’s ridiculous, but seems to be the case.

The atheists arguments are no different (and in many cases worse) than in C.S. Lewis’ day. Yet, most people have no idea.

They usually haven’t gotten to the bottom of things till years into their journey at which time things look pretty bleak.

Classical atheists were sad that God didn’t exist and owned that the outlook was completely miserable. New atheists are strangely glib and sometimes ecstatic in their claim that there’s no God. They seem to forget that — according to all previous atheists — life is bleak and meaningless in the absence of God.

Related image

No ultimate meaning, despite finding meaning week to week in subjective and personal choices month to month. New atheism is a pop-cultural phenomenon.

Richard Dawkins (perhaps the most famous atheist in the world today), outside the pop culture, is ridiculed by academics for his poor arguments and avoidance of past obstacles. But your cousin who left faith doesn’t understand any of this. He thinks he’s smarter than you, you dummie!

Related image

I have an atheist/agnostic friend who used to be a full-on LDS-hating atheist. Now, after a few years of cooling down, kinda hopes for God, but still rails against the Church. He just can’t let go of his critical interpretations. Most (85%) of our doubts are emotional doubts.

This fellow, William Lane Craig, is a wonderful creedal Christian defender comments on new atheism:

Discussing the most significant cultural challenges to belief in our society:

Theosis and Deification

Image result for theosis

Short podcast from a review of Andrew Skinner’s new book:

A Compelling Case for Theosis

Abstract: What is theosis? Why does the doctrine of theosis matter? Why did God become man so that man might become God? In his book To Become Like God, Andrew C. Skinner answers these questions with compelling clarity. He provides ample convincing evidence that, far from being a deviation from original Christian beliefs, the doctrine of theosis, or the belief that human beings have the potential to become like God, is central to the Christian faith.

 

Image result for blake ostler

Brilliant insight (as usual) from Blake Ostler:

Topics Discussed:   Arguments That Essential Divine Properties Cannot Be Shared with Humans

– Can a Fulness of Divine Power Be Shared?

– Can Divine Sovereignty Be Shared By Humans?

– Are Deified Humans Worthy of Divine Worship?

 

 

 

Latter-day Saints have a unique theology.  We believe our Heavenly Father and his Son are separate beings and that they have exalted bodies.  We believe we can be like them.

This notion of becoming like God is not new.  It’s biblical.

Episode 63: Becoming Like God – Terryl Givens

One can read a lengthy paper on the topic:   Defenders of the Doctrine of Deification.

 

Image result for irenaeus

In this Maxwell Institute podcast below, Powell talks about his book, “Irenaeus, Joseph Smith, and God-Making Heresy.”

The idea that humans can become gods appeared in a setting of extreme opposition both for early Mormons like Joseph Smith, and early Christian leaders like Iranaeus.

 

The principles associated with theosis presented by Jordan Watkins:

Non-Mormon, Margaret Barker, spoke in 2016.  Among many other points, Margaret shared that the Deuteronomist editors removed references to the a human-form Heavenly Father visiting Old Testament prophets (after 26:00).

After the first hour, three LDS scholars shared their own insights:

Valuable insights about Solomon’s Temple:

Roger Cook discusses theosis below:

Brett McDonald presents below:

 

Latter-day Saints believe we are more than creatures.  “Ye are Gods” is found in John 10:34 and Psalm 82:6.

Part ii:

Hugh Nibley connected Egyptian rituals with LDS temple rites and ceremonies.

Deification discussion:

Debate between evangelical James White and two LDS apologists: Van Hale and Tanner Martin.

Deification in a Mesoamerican mindset: