Orson Hyde's Diagram of the Kingdom of God
This diagram by Orson Hyde was published in the Millennial Star in 1847. It shows his vision (and that of many early
Latter-day Saints) of the organization of the Kingdom of God. The text below is quoted from the accompanying
editorial.
The above diagram shows the order and unity of the kingdom of God. The eternal Father sits at the head, crowned
King of kings and Lord of lords. Wherever the other lines meet, there sits a king and a priest unto God, bearing rule,
authority, and dominion under the Father. He is one with the Father, because his kingdom is joined to his Father's and
becomes part of it.
The most eminent and distinguished prophets who have laid down their lives for their testimony (Jesus among the
rest), will be crowned at the head of the largest kingdoms under the Father, and will be one with Christ as Christ is
one with his Father; for their kingdoms are all joined together, and such as do the will of the Father, the same are his
mothers, sisters, and brothers. He that has been faithful over a few things, will be made ruler over many things; he
that has been faithful over ten talents, shall have dominion over ten cities, and he that has been faithful over five
talents, shall have dominion over five cities, and to every man will be given a kingdom and a dominion, according to
his merit, powers, and abilities to govern and control. It will be seen by the above diagram that there are kingdoms of
all sizes, an infinite variety to suit all grades of merit and ability. The chosen vessels unto God are the kings and priests
that are placed at the head of these kingdoms. These have received their washings and anointings in the temple of
God on this earth; they have been chosen, ordained, and anointed kings and priests, to reign as such in the
resurrection of the just. Such as have not received the fulness of the priesthood, (for the fulness of the priesthood
includes the authority of both king and priest) and have not been anointed and ordained in the temple of the Most
High, may obtain salvation in the celestial kingdom, but not a celestial crown. Many are called to enjoy a celestial
glory, yet few are chosen to wear a celestial crown, or rather, to be rulers in the celestial kingdom.
While this portion of eternity that we now live in, called time, continues, and while the other portions of eternity that
we may hereafter dwell in, continue, those lines in the foregoing diagram, representing kingdoms, will continue to
extend and be lengthened out; and thus, the increase of our kingdoms will increase the kingdom of our God, even as
Daniel hath said: “of the increase of his kingdom and government there shall be no end.” All these kingdoms are one
kingdom, and there is a King over kings, and a Lord over lords. There are Lords many, and Gods many, for they are
called Gods to whom the word of God comes, and the word of God comes to all these kings and priests. But to our
branch of the kingdom there is but one God, to whom we all owe the most perfect submission and loyalty; yet our
God is just as subject to still higher intelligences, as we should be to him.
...These kingdoms, which are one kingdom, are designed to extend till they not only embrace this world, but every
other planet that rolls in the blue vault of heaven. Thus will all things be gathered in one during the dispensation of
the fulness of times, and the Saints will not only possess the earth, but all things else, for, says Paul, “All things are
yours, whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come: all are
yours, and ye are Christ's, and Christ is God's”
(Orson Hyde, “A Diagram of the Kingdom of God,” Millennial Star 9 [15 January 1847]: 23-24).
My source for this is the excellent Words of Joseph Smith: The Contemporary Accounts of the Nauvoo Discourses of
the Prophet Joseph compiled and edited by Andrew F. Ehat and Lyndon W. Cook. In their footnote, they add this:
According to the teachings that the Prophet gave in private (but which he only hinted at in this discourse [13 August
1843]), to be heir to Abraham's promise that he would head an innumerable posterity, each individual and his
children must be sealed for time and eternity. If this sealing was performed, he taught, the covenant relationship
would then continue throughout eternity. The Prophet taught, moreover, that such a patriarchal priesthood of kings
and priests would have to be established by sealing children and parents back through Abraham to Adam in order to
fulfill the mission of Elijah (Malachi 4:5-6). When this was accomplished, the order within the highest degree of the
Celestial Kingdom would then be eternally set. Probably no clearer statement of Joseph's theology regarding this
concept can be found than what is given in an editorial by Orson Hyde. The following diagram began the editorial
after which came the text.
Joseph Smith, The Words of Joseph Smith: The Contemporary Accounts of the Nauvoo Discourses of the Prophet
Joseph, compiled and edited by Andrew F. Ehat and Lyndon W. Cook [Provo: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1980],
297.)
Lorenzo Snow couplet theology
From MormonWiki.org
Jump to: navigation, search
Lorenzo Snow, the fifth president and prophet of the mainstream sect of Mormonism, is famous both in and outside
of Mormonism for his couplet:
"As man is God once was, as God is man may be."
This short sentence summarizes the traditional understanding of what Joseph Smith taught in the "Sermon in the
Grove"[1] and, most famously, in the "King Follett Discourse"[2].
Snow's sister notes that:
"Being present at a 'Blessing Meeting,' in the Temple, previous to his baptism into the Church; after listening to
several patriarchal blessings pronounced upon the heads of different individuals with whose history he was
acquainted, and of whom he knew the Patriarch was entirely ignorant; he was struck with astonishment to hear the
peculiarities of those persons positively and plainly referred to in their blessings. And, as he afterwards expressed, he
was convinced that an influence, superior to human prescience, dictated the words of the one who officiated.
"The Patriarch was the father of Joseph, the Prophet. That was the first time Lorenzo had met him. After the services,
they were introduced, and Father Smith said to my brother that he would soon be convinced of the truth of the latterday work, and be baptized; and he said: ‘You will become as great as you can possibly wish—EVEN AS GREAT AS GOD,
and you cannot wish to be greater.’ " (Eliza R. Snow, Biography and Family Record of Lorenzo Snow, Salt Lake City:
Deseret News Co., 1884, pp. 9–10.)
This theology became foundational to early, post-Nauvoo Mormon theology. Indeed, Smith claimed in the King Follett
Discourse that:
"It is the first principle of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of God, and to know that we may converse
with Him as one man converses with another, and that He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father
of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ Himself did... Here, then, is eternal life: to know the only wise
and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as
all Gods have done before you-namely, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a
great one; from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead, and are
able to dwell in everlasting burnings, and to sit in glory, as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power."
(emphasis added)[3]
Modern Mormonism has truncated that which what Smith considered "the first principle of the gospel" and
obfuscated what he considered "eternal life". It is not uncommon to hear a Mormon say about the theology of either
half of the Lorenzo Snow couplet (especially the first): "I don't know, and I don't care, because it isn't relevant to my
salvation."
Preferring more palatable and generalized language than what Joseph Smith and historic Mormon authorities have
used, modern Mormons speak of the doctrine of the second half of the couplet using such phrases as:

"become like God"

"become like our Father in heaven"

"exaltation"
The same can be said for the first half of the couplet. Today, God the Father is sometimes spoken of as a "glorified and
exalted Man"[4], but the forthrightness earlier used has been abandoned.
Multimedia

Robert Millet, Dean of Religious Studies, BYU, Affirms Lorenzo Snow Couplet Theology (Google Video) - Clip
from 1996 video, The Mormon Puzzle
Contents
[hide]

1 Is it doctrinal?
o
1.1 Modern equivocation

1.1.1 Gordon B. Hinckley's public equivocations
o
1.2 Modern hedging[12]
o
1.3 Modern retraction (developed by Blake Ostler)
o
1.4 The doctrine and church-published literature

2 Was the Father a redeemer on a previous world?

3 Did Elohim sin in the past?

4 Is there an eternal regression of gods?

5 Can we become gods as God the Father is a god?

6 Quotes

7 Notes

8 See also

9 External links
o
9.1 Non-Mormon
o
9.2 Mormon
Is it doctrinal?
Since the very idea and language of "canon" and "doctrine" is problematic in Mormonism, plagued with multiple
definitions and rhetorical flexibility, it is best instead to ask: Was Lorenzo Show couplet theology authoritatively
taught? Has it historically been accepted as authoritative teaching? Does it have continued life in Mormonism? Has it
ever been authoritatively repudiated? Does it still find expression in Church-published literature and curriculum?
"[T]his doctrine is accepted and taught by the Brethren... It is clear that the teaching of President Lorenzo Snow is
both acceptable and accepted doctrine in the Church today." -Hoyt W. Brewster Jr. (now serving as an LDS Seventy), "I
Have a Question," Ensign, Feb. 1982, 38 [5]
"Each one of you has it within the realm of his possibility to develop a kingdom over which you will preside as its king
and god. You will need to develop yourself and grow in ability and power and worthiness, to govern such a world with
all of its people." (Spencer W. Kimball, “. . . the Matter of Marriage” [address delivered at University of Utah Institute
of Religion, 22 Oct. 1976], 2. Quoted in Doctrines of the Gospel Institute manual).
"I bear you my witness that God the Father lives, a glorified and exalted Man. He is the Father of our spirits. He and
His Beloved Son, both resurrected and glorified, appeared to the boy Joseph Smith in a grove of trees in New York."
Henry B. Eyring (Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles), "Gifts of the Spirit for Hard Times". CES Fireside for Young
Adults. September 10, 2006.[6]
In a 1994 Ensign article, Gordon B. Hinckley wrote:
"On the other hand, the whole design of the gospel is to lead us onward and upward to greater achievement, even,
eventually, to godhood. This great possibility was enunciated by the Prophet Joseph Smith in the King Follet sermon
(see Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 342-62; and emphasized by President Lorenzo Snow. It is this grand
and incomparable concept: As God now is, man may become! (See The Teachings of Lorenzo Snow, comp. Clyde J.
Williams, Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1984, p. 1.)
"Our enemies have criticized us for believing in this. Our reply is that this lofty concept in no way diminishes God the
Eternal Father. He is the Almighty. He is the Creator and Governor of the universe. He is the greatest of all and will
always be so. But just as any earthly father wishes for his sons and daughters every success in life, so I believe our
Father in Heaven wishes for his children that they might approach him in stature and stand beside him resplendent in
godly strength and wisdom."[7]
Gospel Principles, a book the Mormon Church actively uses as curriculum, reads as follows:
"Those who receive exaltation in the celestial kingdom through faith in Jesus Christ will receive special blessings. The
Lord has promised, "All things are theirs" (D&C 76:59). These are some of the blessings given to exalted people:
1. They will live eternally in the presence of Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ (see D&C 76).
2. They will become gods.
3. They will have their righteous family members with them and will be able to have spirit children also. These spirit
children will have the same relationship to them as we do to our Heavenly Father. They will be an eternal family.
4. They will receive a fulness of joy.
5. They will have everything that our Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ have--all power, glory, dominion, and
knowledge. President Joseph Fielding Smith wrote: "The Father has promised through the Son that all that he has
shall be given to those who are obedient to his commandments. They shall increase in knowledge, wisdom, and
power, going from grace to grace, until the fulness of the perfect day shall burst upon them" (Doctrines of Salvation,
2:36).[8]
The currently used, correlated and church-published manual Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young
contains the following:
"The doctrine that God was once a man and has progressed to become a God is unique to this Church. How do you
feel, knowing that God, through His own experience, 'knows all that we know regarding the toils [and] sufferings' of
mortality?"[9]
Modern equivocation
Gordon B. Hinckley's public equivocations
President Gordon B. Hinckley with Don Lattin, the San Francisco Chronicle religion writer. The article was dated
Sunday, April 13, 1997 [10]:
Q: There are some significant differences in your beliefs. For instance, don't Mormons believe that God was once a
man?
A: I wouldn't say that. There was a couplet coined, "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become." Now
that's more of a couplet than anything else. That gets into some pretty deep theology that we don't know very much
about.
Time magazine of August 4, 1997, in an article titled "Kingdom Come," page 56 [11]:
Q: Just another related question that comes up is the statements in the King Follet discourse by the Prophet.
A: Yeah
Q: ... about that, God the Father was once a man as we were. This is something that Christian writers are always
addressing. Is this the teaching of the church today, that God the Father was once a man like we are?
A: I don’t know that we teach it. I don’t know that we emphasize it. I haven’t heard it discussed for a long time in
public discourse. I don’t know. I don’t know all the circumstances under which that statement was made. I
understand the philosophical background behind it. But I don’t know a lot about it and I don’t know that others know
a lot about it.
See main article: Gordon B. Hinckley interviews
Modern hedging[12]
When asked about this issue of theology, many Mormons will give responses like:

"Oh, that doesn't pertain to our salvation. We need not worry about that."

"That's just speculation."
When pressed, one finds either that the Mormon has a position but wishes not to disclose it, or is simply disinterested
in taking any position on the issue at all.
Modern retraction (developed by Blake Ostler)
There are some, albeit very few, Mormons who believe that God the Father was always God as he is now. The most
notable and influential proponent of this position is Blake Ostler. His position is that, "While God, the Father of Jesus,
did condescend to become a mortal on one of the innumerable previous inhabited planets, he is the ultimate Celestial
Monarch and has no 'Eternal Father' of his own. Further, Blake holds that the Father was not a Savior to the world to
which he condescended."[13] Essentially, Ostler believes that God was not first a man and then became a God. Instead,
he believes that God has been God from all eternity, but that the Father became incarnate just as the Son did. "... the
Father was divine before his mortal sojourn and underwent a form of kenosis or emptying of himself of the divine
status for a time just as did Christ." [14] Ostler relies heavily on Smith's statement that "God was once a man like us;
yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did..." [15] This
interpretation involves a significant misreading of Joseph Smith's King Follet Discourse and Sermon in the Grove[16], as
Smith was clear on the matter:
"If Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and John discovered that God the Father of Jesus Christ had a Father, you may
suppose that He had a Father also. Where was there ever a son without a father? And where was there ever a father
without first being a son? Whenever did a tree or anything spring into existence without a progenitor? And everything
comes in this way. Paul says that which is earthly is in the likeness of that which is heavenly, Hence if Jesus had a
Father, can we not believe that He had a Father also? I despise the idea of being scared to death at such a doctrine,
for the Bible is full of it."
Those who hold to the neo-orthodox position hold that how the Lorenzo Snow couplet has traditionally been
understood is in some important senses wrong. God was not once as we are now inasmuch as that means he was at
one point, like us, never a god, but then progressed and proved this worthiness unto exaltation and godhood.
Likewise, man will not be as God is, inasmuch as that means that God the Father became a god by submitting to his
god. We will become gods, but never as God the Father is, since he has always been God, has no father-god himself,
and is the ultimate father-god of all gods.
In opposition to Blake's position, Geoff Johnston writes:
"The notion that God came to be God is certainly the understanding that Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, Eliza R.
Snow, Lorenzo Snow, and seemingly all of [Joseph Smith's] companions in church leadership shared. For Blake’s
position to be accepted, we have to accept that this was a colossal misunderstanding and that none of the top leaders
of the church bothered to confirm what the prophet actually meant in the nearly three months after this astonishing
sermon was given."[17]
The doctrine and church-published literature
This section is a stub. Please edit it to add information.
Was the Father a redeemer on a previous world?
This article is a stub. Please edit it to add information.
"All that Father Adam did upon this earth, from the time that he took up his abode in the Garden of Eden, was done
for his posterity's sake and the success of his former mission as the savior of a world." Joseph E. Taylor, 1888 [18]
Did Elohim sin in the past?
"We are precisely in the same condition and under the same circumstances that God our Heavenly Father was when
he was passing through this, or a similar ordeal." - Joseph F. Smith[19]
The Mormon hierarchy takes no official position on whether or not God the Father once sinned before being
resurrected and exalted unto godhood. It is open for members to believe or disbelieve. Since LDS leaders continue to
teach that God the Father was resurrected and exalted, one of three positions by Mormons are usually taken or held
to be possible:
1. God the Father died and was resurrected because he was a fallen and sinful human being. He at some point
repented and proved his worthiness unto exaltation and godhood.
2. Since God the Father played a savior-type role (citing John 5:19) his death and resurrection were because of
his sacrificial mediation (i.e. he did not die because of his own sins).[20]
3. God the Father died and was resurrected, but it is possible this happened for entirely different reasons than
are assumed the case here on this world. God the Father may not have been a savior, and on other worlds
death may not be a consequence for the fallenness or sinfulness of humanity.
Some Mormons are open to believing either way, lean toward one view, but don't feel they can be confident about
taking a position with certainty yet:
"If you take note, it is not the same as man, but the same as Jesus Christ. We believe that Jesus Christ was sinless. If
God the Father dwelt on earth the same as Jesus Christ, then God the Father's earthly ministry was also a sinless one.
I am not proclaiming that it is LDS doctrine that God the Father once served as a savior to previous generation of spirit
children, his brothers and sisters. I am not saying that it is completely impossible that God was a mortal man who
sinned and made mistakes before his exaltation. I am simply saying that the doctrine does not necessarily indicate
that God sinned at some point."[21]
Others find it very probable that the first position is the case:
"My opinion is yes, not only is what you suggested [that God the Father sinned] possible, I think we have to believe it
probably. For, if we do not assume that, we must assume that we'll never become gods ourselves. Sure, someone like
Jesus will become a God and never have sinned, etc. But according to the Church's soteriology, you and I are also
seeking to become a god. Thus, Jesus would be the exception. Most deities would be people who lived mortal
probations and then became gods through relying upon an atonement of a messiah provided them by their messiah."
- Alonzo L. Gaskill, BYU Assistant Professor of Church History and Doctrine (1/24/2007, e-mail dialogue with Aaron
Shafovaloff)
This section is a stub. Please edit it to add information.
Is there an eternal regression of gods?
Those who hold to the traditional view of God the Father's origin usually believe, as Brigham Young taught, in an
eternal regression of gods.
"But if God the Father was not always God, but came to his present exalted position by degrees of progress as
indicated in the teachings of the prophet, how has there been a God from all eternity? The answer is that there has
been and there now exists an endless line of Gods, stretching back into the eternities, that had no beginning and will
have no end. Their existence runs parallel with endless duration, and their dominions are as limitless as boundless
space." - B. H. Roberts, New Witnesses for God, 3 vols., 1:, p.476
This section is a stub. Please edit it to add information.
Can we become gods as God the Father is a god?
"Then will they become Gods, even the sons of God; then will they become eternal fathers, eternal mothers, eternal
sons and eternal daughters; being eternal in their organization they go from glory to glory, from power to power; they
will never cease to increase and to multiply, worlds without end. When they receive their crowns, their dominions,
they then will be prepared to frame earths like unto ours and to people them in the same manner as we have been
brought forth by our parents, by our Father and God." - Brigham Young[22]
"Mortal persons who overcome all things and gain an ultimate exaltation will live eternally in the family unit and have
spirit children, thus becoming Eternal Fathers and Eternal Mothers. (D. & C. 132:19-32.) Indeed, the formal
pronouncement of the Church, issued by the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve, states: "So far as the
stages of eternal progression and attainment have been made known through divine revelation, we are to understand
that only resurrected and glorified beings can become parents of spirit offspring." (Man: His Origin and Destiny, p.
129.)" - Bruce R. McConkie[23]
"So far as the stages of eternal progression and attainment have been made known through divine revelation, we are
to understand that only resurrected and glorified beings can become parents of spirit offspring. Only such exalted
souls have reached maturity in the appointed course of eternal life; and the spirits born to them in the eternal worlds
will pass in due sequence through the sever al stages or estates by which the glorified parents have attained
exaltation." (A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency [Joseph F. Smith, Anthon H. Lund, Charles W. Penrose] and
the Twelve, “The Father and the Son,” Improvement Era, June 1916. Quoted in Achieving a Celestial Marriage Student
Manual, p. 129-132)[24]
Quotes

"God our Heavenly Father was perhaps once a child, and mortal like we are, and rose step by step in the scale
of progress, in the school of advancement; has moved forward and overcome, until He has arrived at the
point where He now is" (Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses 1:123).

"Such limited power we have, and how little can we control the wind and the waves and the storms! We
remember the numerous scriptures which, concentrated in a single line, were said by a former prophet,
Lorenzo Snow: 'As man is, God once was; and as God is, man may become.' This is a power available to us as
we reach perfection and receive the experience and power to create, to organize, to control native elements."
-Spencer W. Kimball, "Our Great Potential," Ensign, May 1977, 49 [3]

"My hope and prayer today is that we will look to ourselves with new responsibility, new self-appreciation,
higher self-image, and greater self-respect. We are children of God. We do possess God-given attributes. We
do have the opportunity and obligation to learn to be leaders. Let us so live that it may be said of us, 'He's
well balanced. He knows where he is going and how to get there. He's a good manager of himself.' By doing
this it will be possible to better serve in the kingdom and have a greater appreciation for Lorenzo Snow’s
thrilling declaration, 'As man now is, God once was. As God now is, man may be.' (See Improvement Era, June
1919, p. 656.) This is what proper self-management is all about." -Marvin J. Ashton, "Proper Selfmanagement," Ensign, Nov. 1976, 84 (Note: this article is placed under the "gospel topic" of "self-esteem") [4]

" 'After death we continue to learn. Exaltation means godhood, creatorship. 'As man now is, God once was; as
God now is, man may be.' (Eliza R. Snow Smith, Biography of Lorenzo Snow, Salt Lake City: Deseret News Co.,
1884, 46.) This is in the future. It is obvious that before one can take of the materials in existence and develop
them into a world like our own, he must be master of geology, zoology, physiology, psychology, and all the
others. It is obvious, also, that no soul can in his short mortal life acquire all this knowledge and master all
these sciences, but he can make a beginning and with the foundation of spiritual life and controls and
mastery, and with the authorities and powers received through the gospel of Christ, he is in a position to
begin this almost limitless study of the secular' (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, ed. Edward L. Kimball,
[1982], 53)." -L. Tom Perry, "Learning to Serve," Ensign, Aug. 1996, 10 [5]

"All these Gods are equal in power, in glory, in dominion, and in the possession of all things; each possesses a
fulness of truth, of knowledge, of wisdom, of light, of intelligence; each governs himself in all things by his
own attributes, and is filled with love, goodness, mercy, and justice towards all. The fulness of all these
attributes is what constitutes God. "God is Light." "God is Love." "God is Truth." The Gods are one in the
qualities and attributes. Truth is not a plurality of truths, be. cause it dwells in a plurality of persons, but it is
one truth, indivisible, though it dwells in millions of persons. Each person is called God, not because of his
substance, neither because of the shape and size of the substance, but because of the qualities which dwell in
the substance. Persons are only tabernacles or temples, and TRUTH is the God, that dwells in them. If the
fulness of truth, dwells in numberless millions of persons, then the same one indivisible God dwells in them
all. As truth can dwell in all worlds at the same instant; therefore, God who is truth can be in all worlds at the
same instant. A temple of immortal flesh, and bones, and spirit, can only be in one place at a time, but truth,
which is God, can dwell in a countless number of such temples in the same moment. When we worship the
Father, we do not merely worship His person, but we worship the truth which dwells in His person. When we
worship the Son, we do not merely worship His body, but we worship truth which resides in Him. So, likewise,
when we worship the Holy Ghost, it is not the substance which we alone worship, but truth which dwells in
that substance. Take away truth from either of these beings, and their persons or substance would not be the
object of worship. It is truth, light, and love that we worship and adore; these are the same in all worlds; and
as these constitute God, He is the same in all worlds; and hence, the inhabitants of all worlds are required to
worship and adore the same God. Because God dwells in many temples, He frequently speaks to us, as though
there were many Gods: this is true when reference is made to the number of His dwelling places; but it is not
true, and cannot be true, in any other sense. Therefore, in all our future statements and reasonings, when we
speak of a plurality of Gods, let it be distinctly understood, that we have reference alone to a plurality of
temples wherein the same truth or God dwells. And also when we speak of only one God, and state that He is
eternal, without beginning or end, and that He is in all worlds at the same instant, let it be distinctly
remembered, that we have no reference to any particular person or substance, but to truth dwelling in a vast
variety of substances. Wherever you find a fulness of wisdom, knowledge, truth, goodness, love, and such like
qualities, there you find God in all His glory, power, and majesty, therefore, if you worship these adorable
perfections you worship God." (Orson Pratt, The Seer, Vol. 1, No. 2, Feb, 1853, p. 24.).

"I do not agree that the teaching that the Father was once like us 'has no functioning place in present-day
Mormon doctrine.' I do, however, agree with President Hinckley's much-criticized comment that, by and
large, we don't teach it. I've never heard a sacrament meeting address on the subject, for example. But it's
there in the background. It's certainly a functioning part of my understanding of my theology." - Daniel
Peterson [6]

"...the Latter-day Saints believe that God the Father is an exalted man, a corporeal being, a personage with
flesh and bones. They do not believe that he is a spirit... Joseph Smith taught in 1844 that God our Father was
once a mortal man, that he lived on an earth, died, was resurrected and glorified, and grew and developed
over time to become the Almighty that he now is. To say this another way, they teach that God is all-powerful
and all-knowing, but that he has not been so forever..." - Robert Millet, The Mormon Faith, 1998, p. 29

"Exaltation is eternal life, the kind of life God lives. He lives in great glory. He is perfect. He possesses all
knowledge and all wisdom. He is the Father of spirit children. He is a creator. We can become like our
Heavenly Father. This is exaltation. If we prove faithful to the Lord, we will live in the highest degree of the
celestial kingdom of heaven. We will become exalted, just like our Heavenly Father. Exaltation is the greatest
gift that Heavenly Father can give his children (see D&C 14:7)." [25]

"I am no big supporter of that [Lorenzo Snow] couplet as it distorts the King Follet discourse and the Sermon
in the Grove." - Jonathan A. Stapley[26]

"KFD 5:1 Jesus, what are you going to do? To lay down my life as my Father did. Joseph Smith's purpose is to
show that the Bible teaches that our Father in Heaven was once mortal, as we are. To do so he takes John
5:19 as a text. Here the Savior said, 'The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for
what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.' The Prophet then reasons that it is Christ's
purpose to lay down his life and take it up again. Thus, if Christ can do only that which his father did, his
father must also have been subject to death, he must have died and then taken up his life again as a
resurrected being. From this statement of the Prophet, many have attempted to reason that he was saying
that his father was also a savior for those of another world and thus that all worlds require their own saviors.
The Prophet never taught such a thing and was not alluding to it here. His remarks centered on the doctrine of
resurrection, not the salvation of God's endless creations. The Prophet had already clearly taught that the
atonement of Christ—which was infinite—embraced all that he had created under the direction of the Father
(see commentary on D&C 76:23-24). Responding to those who wanted to argue that there is a special strain of
savior gods, Elder Bruce R. McConkie often asked, 'What earthly good could possibly come from teaching such
a thing?' " - Joseph Fielding McConkie and Craig J. Ostler, Revelations of the Restoration: A Commentary on
the Doctrine & Covenants & Other Modern Revelations

“There is a statement often repeated in the Church, and while it is not in one of the Standard Church Works, it
is accepted as Church doctrine, and this is: 'As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become’” (LeGrand
Richards, July 14, 1966, letter to Morris L. Reynolds).

"Man is the child of God, formed in the divine image and endowed with divine attributes, and even as the
infant son of an earthly father and mother is capable in due time of becoming a man, so the undeveloped
offspring of celestial parentage is capable, by experience through ages and aeons, of evolving into a God." - A
statement by the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints[27]

"The fact exists that the Father, the Divine Father, whom we serve, the God of the Universe, the God and
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Father of our spirits, provided this sacrifice and sent his Son to die for
us; and it is also a great fact that the Son came to do the will of the Father, and that he has paid the debt, in
fulfilment of the Scripture which says, 'He was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.' Is it so on
any other earth? On every earth. How many earths are there? . . . Consequently every earth has its redeemer,
and every earth has its tempter; and every earth, and the people thereof, in their turn and time, receive all
that we receive, and pass through all the ordeals that we are passing through. (Brigham Young, July 10, 1870.
Journal of Discourses 14:71).

"And do you seriously believe that any reasonably intelligent and reasonably alert long-time member of the
Church doesn't know what the Church teaches on this doctrine?" - Daniel Peterson[28]

We believe that God is a personal being. By a personal being, we mean that he is a man-an exalted man.
Approximately one hundred years ago, soon after Lorenzo Snow became a member of the true Church of
Jesus Christ, he formulated a remarkable couplet which has since that time become famous. He said: "As man
is, God once was; as God is, man may become." (Lorenzo Snow, The Millennial Star 54:404.) Time and time
again during the period of the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ to the Prophet Joseph Smith, various
evidences were given to him sustaining, amplifying, and explaining the personality of God. If time would
permit, many excellent quotations could be cited from the D&C which would help to describe the personality
of our Eternal Father. However, I would like on this occasion to quote a statement taken from a great sermon
which was given by the Prophet Joseph shortly before his death. This quotation is a continuation of the
statement I have already quoted from the Prophet. To use his exact words: 'It is the first principle of the
Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God, and to know that we may converse with him as one man
converses with another, and that he was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of as all, dwelt
on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did. . . . I will go back to the beginning before the world was, to
show what kind of a being God is. What sort of a being was God in the beginning? Open your ears and hear,
all ye ends of the earth . . . God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in
yonder heavens. That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds this world
in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible,-I say, if you
were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form-like yourselves in all the person, image, and very
form as a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion, image and likeness of God, and received
instructions from, and walked, talked and conversed with him, as one man talks and communes with
another.' (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345-346.) I would like to discuss with you for a moment
or two the doctrine of what kind of being God is at the present time. He is an exalted, glorified, celestialized
man, but actually and literally a personal being." - Milton R. Hunter[29]

"Now the Creeds say that God has always been God. But this well-motivated expression of reverence is a
solemn travesty. The truth is infinitely more inspiring: that God Himself became God (whose power now
extends in and through all things) by the mastery of the same ultimate and unchanging conditions to which
you and I are subject. So, likewise, did His Firstborn Son, Jesus the Christ." - Truman G. Madsen (BYU
professor)[30]

"Mormon prophets have continuously taught the sublime truth that God the Eternal Father was once a mortal
man who passed through a school of earth life similar to that through which we are now passing. He became
God-an exalted being-through obedience to the same eternal Gospel truths that we are given opportunity
today to obey." - Milton R. Hunter[31]

“The Father has promised us that through our faithfulness we shall be blessed with the fullness of his
kingdom. In other words, we will have the privilege of becoming like him. To become like him we must have
all the powers of godhood; thus a man and his wife when glorified will have spirit children who eventually will
go on an earth like this one we are on and pass through the same kind of experiences, being subject to mortal
conditions, and if faithful, then they also will receive the fullness of exaltation and partake of the same
blessings. There is no end to this development; it will go on forever. We will become gods and have
jurisdiction over worlds, and these worlds will be peopled by our own offspring.” (Apostle Joseph Fielding
Smith, Doctrines of Salvation 2:48, quoted in Achieving a Celestial Marriage Student Manual, 132, 1976)

"Evidently his Father passed through a period of mortality even as he passed through mortality, and as we all
are doing. Our Father in heaven, according to the Prophet, had a Father, and since there has been a condition
of this kind through all eternity, each Father had a Father, until we come to a stop where we cannot go
further, because of our limited capacity to understand... We are sons and daughters of God in the spirit.
Through the atonement of Jesus Christ, we receive the resurrection, the spirit and the body being united
inseparably, never to be divided, so that we will never die again. We thus become immortal, and if we keep
the commandments which are given us, we will inherit celestial glory. When we receive this great blessing, we
will be sons of God, joint-heirs with Jesus Christ. The Father has promised us that through our faithfulness we
shall be blessed with the fulness of his kingdom. In other words we will have the privilege of becoming like
him. To become like him we must have all the powers of godhood; thus a man and his wife when glorified will
have spirit children who eventually will go on an earth like this one we are on and pass through the same kind
of experiences, being subject to mortal conditions, and if faithful, then they also will receive the fulness of
exaltation and partake of the same blessings. There is no end to this development; it will go on forever. We
will become gods and have jurisdiction over worlds, and these worlds will be peopled by our own offspring.
We will have an endless eternity for this" - Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 2[32]

“One of Lorenzo Snow’s great contributions was his elucidation of the doctrine that man might one day
become like God. As President of the Church he gave a discourse entitled ‘The Grand Destiny of Man.’ He
related how as a young man he had been inspired by one of the Prophet Joseph Smith’s sermons about the
manifestations of God and Jesus Christ to him. Two and one-half years later, after a patriarchal blessing
meeting, Joseph Smith, Sr., had promised Lorenzo that he could become as great as God himself. Two and
one-half years after that, while Lorenzo listened to an explanation of the scriptures, the Lord inspired him to
compose this couplet: ‘As man now is, God once was; As God now is, man may be.’ President Snow stated,
‘Nothing was ever revealed more distinctly than that was to me.’ Shortly before Joseph Smith’s death,
Lorenzo heard him teach the same doctrine. Thereafter Elder Snow made the doctrine one of the subjects of
his own discourses” (Church History in the Fulness of Times, pp.451-452).

"We are charged with the responsibility of getting people out of their ruts and routines, out of their problems
and their pain, out of their little arguments and ignorance and sins, and take them to the Gods - to the Father
and the Son and the Holy Ghost - ultimately we are to take them toward their own Godhood." (Mormon
Apostle Jeffrey Holland, Church News, "Divine Companion: Teaching by the Spirit", page 15, week ending July
4, 2009).

"We are in school, the mortal school, to gain the experiences, the training, the joys, and the sufferings that we
partake of, that we might be educated in all these things and be prepared, if we are faithful and true to the
commandments of the Lord, to become sons and daughters of God, joint heirs with Jesus Christ; and in his
presence to go on to a fullness and a continuation of the seeds forever, and perhaps through our faithfulness
to have the opportunity of building worlds and peopling them... We are in the mortal life to get an
experience, a training, that we couldn't get any other way. And in order to become gods, it is necessary for us
to know something about pain, about sickness, and about the other things that we partake of in this school of
mortality." - Joseph Fielding Smith, October 1967 General Conference; cf “Adam’s Role in Bringing Us
Mortality,” Liahona, Jan 2006, 8–9

After men have got their exaltations and their crowns—have become Gods, even the sons of God—are made
King of kings and Lord of Lords, they have the power then of propagating their species in spirit; and that is the
first of their operations with regard to organizing a world. Power is then given to them to organize the
elements, and then commence the organization of tabernacles. (Brigham Young, JoD, August 28, 1852, 6:275.)
Notes
1. ↑ Text available online here: http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/joseph-smiths-sermon-in-thegrove/
2. ↑ Text available online at LDS.org here: Part 1, Part 2. Paraellel account of known texts of th discourse
available here: http://www.boap.org/LDS/Parallel/1844/7Apr44.html
3. ↑ Joseph Smith, "The King Follett Discourse". Delivered by Joseph Smith, on April 7th 1944, at the funeral for
King Follet:
4. ↑ Henry B. Eyring, "Gifts of the Spirit for Hard Times". Fireside address given on September 10th, 2006.
Available online: http://speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.php?id=11468
5. ↑ Gerald Lund, "I Have a Question," Ensign, Feb. 1982, 38. Under the section entitled, "Is President Lorenzo
Snow’s oft-repeated statement—'As man now is, God once was; as God now is, man may be'—accepted as
official doctrine by the Church?." Available online here.
6. ↑ URL: http://lds.org/broadcast/ces/CESFiresideEyring00941000.pdf
7. ↑ Gordon B. Hinckley, “Don’t Drop the Ball,” Ensign, Nov 1994, 46
8. ↑ Gospel Principles, chapter 47. Available online here: http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,11-1-1359,00.html
9. ↑ "Chapter 4: Knowing and Honoring the Godhead," Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young,
29. Available online here.
10. ↑ http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/1997/04/13/SC36289.DTL&type=printable
11. ↑ http://www.lds-mormon.com/time.shtml
12. ↑ Dictionary.com defines hedging as: "to avoid a rigid commitment by qualifying or modifying a position so as
to permit withdrawal". URL: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hedging
13. ↑ Geoff J, "Yes, God the Father does have a Father". URL:
http://www.newcoolthang.com/index.php/2006/05/the-father-has-a-father/253/
14. ↑ Osterl, Exploring Mormon Thought: The Attributes of God, p. 79
15. ↑ Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 346
16. ↑ See History of the Church, Vol. 6, p. 473-479. See also Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 369-376.
Available online here and here.
17. ↑ Geoff Johnston in "Did God "come to be God" or not?. Available here.
18. ↑ From a discourse given in the Logan temple in 1888 by Joseph E. Taylor, a counselor in the Salt Lake Stake
presidency. See Brian Stuy's Collected Discourses, Volume 1.
19. ↑ Gospel Doctrine: Sermons and Writings of Joseph F. Smith (Salt Lake City: Deseret, 1986), 64.
20. ↑ Also appealed to is the Lectures on Faith, wherein "the Prophet Joseph makes it clear that one cannot have
'faith unto salvation/ if one cannot trust that God is perfect and free from all error and sin." (W. John Walsh)
The Lectures on Faith, however, were decanonized and contain many teachings more consistent with
traditional theism. It is anachronistic to appeal to them for support of post-Nauvoo Mormon theology, since
they were written and taught at a time when Mormonism had not yet abandoned traditional monotheism.
21. ↑ http://theboard.byu.edu/index.php?area=viewall&id=20391
22. ↑ Journal of Discourses, 26 vols., 18:, p.259 - 260. URL: http://www.journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_18/JD18257.html
23. ↑ Mormon Doctrine, 2d ed., p.517
24. ↑ See: http://www.schoolofabraham.com/fatherandson.htm
25. ↑ [1]
26. ↑ [2]
27. ↑ Available here and here.
28. ↑ Available here.
29. ↑ Milton R. Hunter, Conference Report, October 1948, First Day—Morning Meeting. Available online here.
30. ↑ Truman G. Madsen (BYU professor), Eternal Man, p.56. Available online here.
31. ↑ Milton R. Hunter, The Gospel through the Ages (1946 Melchizedek priesthood curriculum), p. 104. Available
online here.
32. ↑ http://gospelink.com/library/document/1714?highlight=3#
-------------------As God Is Man May Be?
By Bill McKeever
Although it is not found in any of Mormonism's Standard Works, an expression which precisely defines the LDS teaching
that men can become Gods was coined by fifth LDS President Lorenzo Snow. In June of 1840, Snow declared, "As man is,
God once was; as God is, man may become." Besides correctly illustrating the Latter-day Saint teaching that God was
once a mere mortal man, this couplet also declares that man has the potential to become God! According to LDS
theology, eternal life is synonymous with godhood. In the words of LDS Apostle Bruce McConkie, "Thus those who gain
eternal life receive exaltation ... They are gods." (Mormon Doctrine, pg. 237).
On page 115 of his book entitled The Gospel Through the Ages, LDS Seventy Milton R. Hunter wrote, "No prophet of
record gave more complete and forceful explanations of the doctrine that men may become Gods than did the American
Prophet." If eventual Godhood was such a common teaching among early Christians (as Mormons insist), why do we
have to go to Joseph Smith to find out about it? If there was indeed a cover-up, it was surely one of unbelievable
magnitude.
Though some Mormons, ignorant of their faith, may argue Godhood is not a teaching peculiar to Mormonism, history
proves that it indeed was and is. Both the "Journal of Discourses" (JOD) and the "Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith"
(TPJS) record that, on April 6, 1844, LDS Church founder Joseph Smith preached to a congregation of 20,000 saying,
"Here then is eternal life - to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves,
and to be kings and priests to God the same as all Gods have done before you" (JOD 6:4; TPJS p.346). Brigham Young,
the second prophet and president of the Mormon Church, delivered a message in the Salt Lake Tabernacle on August 8,
1852, in which he affirmed this teaching when he said, "The Lord created you and me for the purpose of becoming Gods
like Himself" (JOD 3:93).
Biblical Denial
History does bear record to people wishing to become Gods; however, one would be hard-pressed to find a biblical basis
for this teaching. Isaiah 43:10 makes it clear that no man, Mormon included, will ever attain Godhood for it says, "I am
He; before Me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after Me."
Regardless of what Joseph Smith and other Mormon leaders have said about men passing on to Godhood, the fact
remains that the God of the Bible, who is all knowing, says He knows of no other Gods (Isaiah 44:8). Surely this should
prove that no mortal has ever attained Godhood; not Joseph Smith, not Brigham Young, no one!
The God of the Bible adamantly declares that He is the first and the last. From eternity past to eternity future, there will
never be a true God besides the one God as presented in the Bible (Isaiah 45:5).
Mormon Rebuttal
Mormons will often use verses such as John 10:34 to counter these biblical truths. Here Jesus stands at the famous
"porch of Solomon" and responds to the blindness of the religious leaders of his day. He rebukes their unbelief by
quoting from Psalm 82:6 which reads, "I have said, Ye are gods." Some Mormons have interpreted this to mean Jesus
Himself said that men could one day attain the level of deity. The problem with such an interpretation is that Jesus does
not say, "Ye can become Gods." The text reads, "Ye are Gods." Not even Mormons believe that they are Gods right now.
At best they are what many LDS leaders have called, "gods in embryo" (The Miracle of Forgiveness, p. 286). Successfully
interpreting this passage lies in figuring out what the word "gods" means. Fortunately, we can discover this by the Bible
itself.
When Psalm 82 is examined, it is not hard to see that this short psalm of Asaph is actually a word of rebuke. While
Mormons are quick to quote verse six, they fail to include verse seven which states that the gods of verse six "shall die
like men." If gods can die, then eternal life, as defined by Mormonism, is not very eternal.
The gods of Psalm 82 are nothing more than men who, by God's sovereign design, are chosen to rule over other men. In
fact, the word "Elohim," used in verse six, is often translated "judges" in the Old Testament. An example of this can be
found in Exodus 21:6 where it reads, "Then his master shall bring him unto the judges [Elohim] ..." Another example is
Exodus 22:8 which reads, "If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges ..."
Again, the Hebrew Elohim is used.
No doubt many Latter-day Saints will look upon this interpretation with suspicion. Should that be the case, one of
Mormonism's most respected scholars, Apostle James Talmage, should be quoted. In his book "Jesus The Christ,"
Talmage agreed that Jesus was referring to divinely appointed judges when he wrote, "Divinely Appointed Judges Called
'gods.' In Psalm 82:6, judges invested by divine appointment are called 'gods.' To this the Savior referred in His reply to
the Jews in Solomon's Porch. Judges so authorized officiated as the representatives of God and are honored by the
exalted title 'gods'" (p. 465).
Some Latter-day Saints have used I John 3:2 to support the Mormon claim that men can become Gods. This passage
reads, "Beloved, now are ye the sons of God, and it doeth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that, when He
shall appear, we shall be like Him." Mormons insist that to be "like Him" means they will have all of the attributes of God
Himself. If that is so, does that mean a Mormon will someday become omnipotent? To have more than one omnipotent
being defies the very meaning of the word. Furthermore, to draw such a conclusion once again ignores the many
passages of the Bible which declare the existence of only one God.
Conclusion
To Mormons who think they will someday become Gods of their own realms, we ask, "Did you make the heavens and
the earth?" If not, consider the following passages from Jeremiah 10:10, 11:
"But the Lord is the true God, He is the living God, and an everlasting king: at His wrath the earth shall tremble, and the
nations shall not be able to abide his indignation. Thus shall ye say unto them, The gods that have not made the heavens
and the earth, even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens."
If the Lord is the only true God then will you be a false god? If He is the only living God, will you be a dead God? If you
hope to become a God but did not make the heavens and the earth, according to the above passages, you can expect to
perish. It may be argued that this verse refers to pagan idols. However that may be, let us not forget Psalm 96:5, which
says that God considers all the gods of the nations as idols, whether they are hewn from wood, or stone, or "exalted"
through good works. All will perish.
Even if Godhood was a biblical possibility, obtaining it according to Mormonism would be in and of itself an impossible
feat. According to Bruce McConkie, "... only those who obey the fulness of the gospel law will inherit eternal life"
(Mormon Doctrine, p. 237). It would be safe to say that most Mormons do not even know what the "fulness of gospel
law" includes, much less obey it.
The possibility of man becoming divine is a man-made promise that the true God will not honor. It was His plan that we
become His children by faith in Jesus Christ, to live with Him throughout eternity as His people (not fellow Gods). In and
of ourselves we can do nothing to earn our way there. That debt was paid by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ
Himself. Because our good works on their own are like filthy rags in God's sight (Isaiah 64:6), it is imperative that we
forsake any such hope of self-exaltation and Godhood and trust in Christ alone for the eternally true salvation that only
He can give. Only then will you be able to rejoice at the sight of the new heaven and new earth and hear:
"... a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they
shall be His people, and God Himself shall be with them, and He shall be their God." Rev. 21:3
What is the Status of the First Half of the Lorenzo Snow Couplet in Mormonism?
by Aaron Shafovaloff
“As man is God once was, as God is man may be.”
Many non-Mormons make the mistake of either stereotyping Mormons as those who firmly believe in the entirety of
the Lorenzo Snow couplet or over-generalizing Mormonism as strongly abandoning the belief. Based on the collective
experience of myself and those in the ministry with me, here are some thoughts on the issue that I hope will be helpful
to anyone trying to sort this out.

Even the Mormons who disaffirm it find it an acceptable position for a Mormon to hold. Affirming the first half
of the couplet (and even that God possibly was, probably was, or certainly was a sinner) isn’t seen as cause for a
disciplinary council, disfellowship, or excommunication.

Past leaders have explicitly affirmed it and their authoritative remarks on the issue have never been formally
repudiated with the same degree of authoritativeness.

Among those who take a position on the issue, it is still the dominant position over any minority readings of the
King Follett Discourse (which the couplet has traditionally functioned to summarize).

A large number of Mormons take no position on the matter and don’t find the issue important enough to take a
position on.

Some Mormons see Hinckley’s public hedging/ambivalence on the issue as a license to back away from the
traditional position and then learn toward having no position or having a minority, non-traditional position.
Others see it as a justifiable public relations move, and see Hinckley’s subsequent Conference remarks (which
referenced the famous interview) as innuendo that it is still doctrine.

According to the more robust definitions of what constitutes “official” doctrine, such as the standard of Robert
Millet which was recently endorsed on the LDS Newsroom, the first half of the Lorenzo Snow couplet fails the
test of what constitutes official doctrine. However, since it is not an "official declaration" or "proclamation", this
Newsroom article fails its own test. Also, using the article's standard of what constitutes official doctrine, many
other basic, widely-held Mormon beliefs that are promoted in church-published, correlated literature are
neither “official.” Since Mormonism has no official position on what constitutes an absolutely official position,
this issue is messy and probably not worth tackling in a context with few words available.

Many Mormons are not aware of the more robust definitions suggested for what constitutes “official” doctrine,
and simply assume the first half of the couplet is official doctrine. Many others, in the context of being
challenged with the historic teaching, will take recourse in the fact that it isn’t official, even though they
personally believe it (compare this with a common Mormon response when challenged over whether they
believe in the existence of Heavenly Mother).

What Gerald N. Lund wrote in a 1982 Ensign is still relevant for today: "To my knowledge there has been no
'official' pronouncement by the First Presidency declaring that President Snow’s couplet is to be accepted as
doctrine. But that is not a valid criteria for determining whether or not it is doctrine. Generally, the First
Presidency issues official doctrinal declarations when there is a general misunderstanding of the doctrine on the
part of many people. Therefore, the Church teaches many principles which are accepted as doctrines but which
the First Presidency has seen no need to declare in an official pronouncement. This particular doctrine has been
taught not only by Lorenzo Snow, fifth President of the Church, but also by others of the Brethren before and
since that time... [T]his doctrine is accepted and taught by the Brethren... It is clear that the teaching of
President Lorenzo Snow is both acceptable and accepted doctrine in the Church today." (“I Have a Question,”
Ensign, February 1982, p. 38)

The recently published church manual, Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, which will be widely
used as official church curriculum in 2008, has a key quote from the King Follett Discourse in chapter 2: "God
Himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!" Given how this
quote is understood within the traditional interpretative framework and worldview of Mormonism, for many
Mormons it affirms the first half of the Lorenzo Snow couplet.

The most significant non-traditional stance is as follows: the parallel in the King Follett Discourse and John 5:19
made between the mortal experience of the Father and the Son is stronger than the parallel between our mortal
experience and that of the Father. Thus the parallel commonly perceived in the Lorenzo Snow couplet is too
strong and unwarranted. Unlike us, the Father never was a sinner, never himself received forgiveness or
benefited from an atonement, and probably was in a mortal experience to play the role of a savior like Jesus did.
Here is some concise language that is probably warranted in describing the status of the first half of the Lorenzo Snow
couplet:

It is the majority, dominant position.

With some exceptions, many Mormons can be generalized as affirming/believing it, while many others would
take a non-committal stance even while recognizing that the larger history and system of Mormon doctrine
suggest that it is true.

Mormons unanimously find the position acceptable to hold, i.e. not warranting any church disciplinary action.

It is a traditional doctrine that has strong, continued life within Mormonism.
We at Mormonism Research Ministry encourage Christians to continue to lovingly question and challenge their Mormon
neighbors over the traditional Mormon theology expressed by the Lorenzo Snow couplet. We also encourage Christians
to contrast it with passages like Isaiah 43:10: “Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.” If, in the
past 2000 years, a person went from believing that Jesus Christ was a sinner to taking a non-committal stance on the
matter, would authentic Christendom have at any point seen this as a sufficient departure from gross heresy? Neither
should we Christians find it acceptable that any Mormon takes a non-committal stance on whether God the Father once
participated in a mortal probation to progress unto a godhood not already fully possessed by nature. Furthermore, it is
not sufficient for a Mormon to merely take a non-traditional position. True repentance demands that a person be willing
to publicly renounce the traditional doctrine of the Lorenzo Snow couplet as tragic and heinous heresy. We call upon
Mormons of public influence to do this, as “faith without works is dead” (James 2:20). We pray for the Mormon people,
whom we dearly love, that one day we may say of them, “Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to
those that by nature are not gods” (Galatians 4:8). “For they themselves report concerning us the kind of reception we
had among you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God” (1 Thessalonians 1:9).
Does Lorenzo Snow's famous couplet no longer have a functioning place in LDS theology?
By Bill McKeever
"It is a 'Mormon' truism that is current among us and we all accept it, that as man is God once was and as God is man
may become."
— Elder Melvin J. Ballard
General Conference, April 1921
"From President Snow's understanding of the teachings of the Prophet on this doctrinal point, he coined the familiar
couplet: 'As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become.' This teaching is peculiar to the restored gospel of
Jesus Christ."
Marion Romney (1st Presidency)
General Conference, October 1964
"The Lorenzo Snow couplet expresses a true statement: 'As man is, God once was; and as God is, man may become.'"
Seventy Bruce C. Hafen
The Broken Heart: Applying the Atonement to Life's Experiences, 1989, p.133
"This process known as eternal progression is succinctly expressed in the LDS aphorism, 'As man is, God once was. As
God is, man may become.'"
Encyclopedia of Mormonism 4:1474
For much of its history, the LDS Church has defended and taught the concept that God was once a man and that faithful
Mormon men have the capacity to become Gods. This teaching was capsulated in what has become popularly known as
the "Lorenzo Snow couplet."
Lorenzo Snow joined the LDS Church in 1836 at the age of 21. He was ordained an apostle in 1849. When Wilford
Woodruff died in 1898, he became Mormonism's fifth president. Snow claims that his couplet came to him by revelation
just prior to leaving on a mission to England in 1840. When Snow returned from his mission three years later, he spoke
to Joseph Smith about what he felt God had revealed to him. Joseph Smith's reply was, "Brother Snow, that is a true
gospel doctrine, and it is a revelation from God to you" (LeRoi C. Snow, "Devotion to a Divine Inspiration," Improvement
Era, June 1919, p.656).
Smith himself would teach this concept in his famous King Follett discourse given in 1844; since that time, LDS leaders
have alluded to "this true gospel doctrine" in numerous conference messages, books, and periodicals.
November 14, 2004
In November of 2004, Christian apologist/philosopher Ravi Zacharias addressed a packed house in the Mormon
Tabernacle. To have a Christian of Zacharias' caliber speak in such a venue was certainly unusual; however, due to a
controversial apology made by Dr. Richard Mouw, the president of Fuller Seminary in California, much of what Dr.
Zacharias had to say has been pushed into the background.
Dr. Mouw's short speech preceded Zacharias, but it will be long remembered for the way it impugned the integrity of
Christian pastors and ministries who make a concerted effort to bring the gospel to the Mormon people. In his remarks
he apologized for the way evangelicals have borne "false witness" when it comes to the teachings of the LDS Church. He
added, "We have told you what you believe without making a sincere effort first of all to ask you what you believe."
Much could be said about Dr. Mouw's use of a stereotype to apologize for a stereotype, but in keeping with the title of
this article, I would like to address a comment Dr. Mouw made when he was asked to clarify his statement. In doing so
Dr. Mouw wrote, "I have received emails in the past few days where evangelicals have said that Mormonism teaches
that God was once a human being like us, and we can become gods just like God now is. Mormon leaders have
specifically stated that such a teaching, while stated by past leaders, is something they don't understand and has no
functioning place in present day Mormon doctrine."
Dr. Mouw offered no evidence from LDS leaders to support his claim. Considering how often LDS leaders have taught on
this subject, it seems nonsensical to insist that they are confused about what Lorenzo Snow or Joseph Smith meant.
Dr. Mouw instead solicited the help of BYU professors Robert Millet and Stephen Robinson in his defense: "Bob Millet
has made the same point to many of us, and Stephen Robinson insisted, in the book he co-authored with Craig Blomberg,
that this is not an official Mormon teaching, even though it can be found in non-canonical Mormon writings." If Dr.
Mouw is accurately relating what he was told, then we must ask why Dr. Millet would make such a comment when he
himself supported Lorenzo Snow's couplet in a July 1996 Ensign article titled, "The Eternal Gospel."
On page 53 Dr. Millet wrote, "Knowing what we know concerning God our Father—that he is a personal being; that he
has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as our own; that he is an exalted and glorified being; that he was once a man
and dwelt on an earth—and knowing that this knowledge was had by many of the ancients, should we be surprised to
find legends and myths throughout the cultures of the earth concerning gods who have divine power but human
attributes and passions?"
It should also be pointed out that in the book Dr. Mouw mentions above (How Wide the Divide?); co-author Stephen
Robinson does not at all discount the significance of Snow's couplet. In fact he calls this teaching "normative" in LDS
thought. On page 87 of How Wide the Divide he wrote, "…it is the official teaching of the LDS Church that God the Father
has a physical body (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22). The belief that God the Father was once a human being rests
mainly on two technically uncanonized sources (sermons of Joseph Smith and Lorenzo Snow) which have, however, in
effect become normative"
Notice that Dr. Robinson fully acknowledges that this was taught by both Smith and Snow. Why in the world should it
matter if the teachings are "uncanonized" if they are, in fact, normative in Mormon thought? To downplay the teaching's
significance with such a game of semantics seems like an incredible display of intellectual dishonesty.
On page 91 of How Wide the Divide, Dr. Robinson goes on to state, "Nothing I say here should be interpreted as denying
the importance for Mormonism of God's corporality and God's nature as an exalted man. Neither am I denying the
importance of LDS belief that we humans are literally God's children and can become what God is. These are lynchpins in
LDS theology."
Consider also that the July 1982 edition of Ensign, Elder Gerald Lund (now serving as an LDS Seventy) stated, "It is clear
that the teaching of President Lorenzo Snow is both acceptable and accepted doctrine in the Church today" ("I have a
question," Ensign, p.38)" To my knowledge this statement has never been rescinded by the First Presidency.
Notice carefully the word "doctrine" in the above quote. Mormon apologists love to hide behind the phrase "official
doctrine," but as I have said more than once, none of them can come up with a definition of "official doctrine" that has
been used consistently throughout LDS Church history. Like it or not, many LDS leaders with much more authority than a
BYU professor have referred to this teaching as doctrine — this includes Joseph Smith!
Ask, don't tell
Dr. Mouw accuses evangelicals of telling Mormons what they believe rather than asking them. While I am sure some
Christians have unfortunately approached Mormons in that manner, I don't think it is wise to elevate a Mormon's
unique and personal views to the level of LDS leaders.
For instance, Dr. Mouw claims he was told by Robert Millet that Lorenzo Snow's couplet has no functioning place in
present-day Mormonism. I contacted the LDS Church public relations department and asked if Dr. Millet "was expressing
an official church position." It wasn't a trick question, but I did ask with the hope that I would get an "official" answer. On
November 30, 2004, I received the following from LDS spokesman Dale Bills: "Dr. Millet does not speak for the Church.
Church doctrine is established by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles."
While he made it clear that Dr. Millet has no authority to speak for the church (no surprise here), he really didn't clarify
whether or not the couplet was still considered a part of the LDS faith.
Since my question wasn't really answered, I sent a follow up email on December 2nd. In this post I wrote, "Mr. Bills,
Thank you for your reply. May I then conclude that Lorenzo's Snow's couplet still has a vital role in LDS teaching?"
After patiently waiting a month and a half for a response, I sent another post on January 17, 2005. Once again I asked
Mr. Bills if the Snow couplet was a functional teaching in the LDS Church. As of this writing, he has not seen fit to reply. I
found his silence quite baffling. Why can't the LDS Church PR department answer a simple yes or no question? After all,
the January 2005 issue of the Ensign magazine had no problem supporting at least half of Snow's couplet when it stated
on pages 48-49, "The Prophet Joseph Smith taught of a much simpler and more sensible relationship: God himself was
once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens" ("Created in the Image of God, Male
and Female," Ensign, pp.48-49).
Conclusion
Much can be deduced from all of this. First of all, it is a mistake to assume that BYU professors are always a good source
for correct interpretations of LDS teaching. It is not uncommon to find such individuals being out of doctrinal harmony
with the church that pays their salaries.
Second, since lay members in the LDS Church do not speak for the church, it is wrong for Christians to criticize fellow
Christians who understand this concept better than they do.
Third, sometimes asking our Mormon friends for answers to our questions doesn't always yield an accurate answer.
Sometimes, as in the case with Dale Bills, it yields virtually no answer!
In the summer of 2004 I was doing research for a couple of articles I was asked to write for two magazines. I went to
church headquarters to see if I might have an audience with a church spokesman "whom I could quote." At first this
didn't seem to be a problem, but when I called back to confirm I was met with a lack of enthusiasm. Despite the fact that
I demonstrated to them that I was a published author and that my request was legitimate, my request was ignored.
As Mr. Bills has correctly pointed out, only the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve have the authority to establish
LDS doctrine. However, when those who speak authoritatively for the church refuse to do so, they only increase the
suspicion outsiders have for their church.
---------------What do Latter-day Saints mean when they say that God was once a man?
by FARMS
Joseph Smith taught in April 1844:
God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great
secret. If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all
things by His power, was to make himself visible,-I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in
form-like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man. . . .
. . . It is the first principle of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of God, and to know that we may converse
with Him as one man converses with another, and that He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of
us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ Himself did.23
As we have seen, Lorenzo Snow, fifth president of the LDS Church, summarized this doctrine in a couplet: "As man now
is, God once was; As God now is, man may be."24
In proclaiming this doctrine, neither Joseph Smith nor his successors have in any way sought to limit or degrade the
Almighty. In fact, both the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants state emphatically that there is no
knowledge or power or divine attribute that God does not possess in perfection. "O how great the holiness of our God!
For he knoweth all things, and there is not anything save he knows it" (2 Nephi 9:20; see 2 Nephi 2:24; Moroni 7:22). He
truly "has all power, all wisdom, and all understanding" (Alma 26:35). He who is "mightier than all the earth" (1 Nephi
4:1) "comprehendeth all things, and all things are before him" (D&C 88:41). Mormons accept the reality that "there is a
God in heaven, who is infinite and eternal, from everlasting to everlasting the same unchangeable God, the framer of
heaven and earth, and all things which are in them" (D&C 20:17).
Mortality
That God was once a mortal being is in no way inconsistent with the fact that he now has all power and all knowledge
and possesses every virtue, grace, and godly attribute. He acquired perfection through long periods of growth,
development, and progression, "by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one;
from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation," as Joseph Smith explained. "When you climb up a ladder, you must
begin at the bottom, and ascend step by step, until you arrive at the top; and so it is with the principles of the gospelyou must begin with the first, and go on until you learn all the principles of exaltation. But it will be a great while after
you have passed through the veil before you will have learned them. It is not all to be comprehended in this world; it will
be a great work to learn our salvation and exaltation even beyond the grave."25
From Everlasting to Everlasting
How, then, do Latter-day Saints reconcile the scriptural description of God as being "from everlasting to everlasting"
with the idea that he has not always been God? For one thing, they believe that biblical passages that speak of God's
eternality and of his being the same yesterday, today, and forever make reference to his divine attributes-his love,
constancy, and willingness to bless his people (see, for example, Psalm 102:27; Hebrews 1:12; 13:8). Such passages are
also found in the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants and, again, refer to God's divine nature (see 1 Nephi
10:18-19; 2 Nephi 27:23; Alma 7:20; Mormon 9:8-11, 19; Moroni 8:18; 10:7; D&C 3:2; 20:12, 17; 35:1).
Not much has been revealed about this concept beyond the fact that God was once a man and that over a long period of
time he gained the knowledge, power, and divine attributes necessary to know all things and have all power. Because he
has held his exalted status for a longer period than any of us can conceive, he is able to speak in terms of eternity and
can state that he is from everlasting to everlasting. President Joseph Fielding Smith explained that "from eternity to
eternity means from the spirit existence through the probation which we are in, and then back again to the eternal
existence which will follow. Surely this is everlasting, for when we receive the resurrection, we will never die. We all
existed in the first eternity. I think I can say of myself and others, we are from eternity; and we will be to eternity
everlasting, if we receive the exaltation."26
Empathy
President Brigham Young taught that our Father in Heaven "has passed the ordeals we are now passing through; he has
received an experience, has suffered and enjoyed, and knows all that we know regarding the toils, sufferings, life and
death of this mortality, for he has passed through the whole of it, and has received his crown and exaltation."27 Men and
women can thus relate to him as a father and pray to him with the perfect assurance that he understands our struggles.
His experience contributes to his empathy as well as to his omniscient and all-loving capacity to judge his children.
President Young observed that "it must be that God knows something about temporal things, and has had a body and
been on an earth, were it not so He would not know how to judge men righteously, according to the temptations and sin
they have had to contend with."28
For Latter-day Saints, God is far more than the ultimate cosmic force or primal cause; he is a personal being, an exalted
Man of Holiness, literally our Father in Heaven (see Moses 6:57). He has a body, parts, and passions. He is approachable,
knowable, and, like his Beloved Son, able to be touched with the feeling of our infirmities (see Hebrews 4:15). He has
tender regard for his children and desires that we become as he is-not through our personal effort alone, but primarily
through the mercy, grace, and transforming and glorifying power that come through the atonement of Jesus Christ.
These doctrines are not clearly stated in the Bible. Mormons believe, however, that this knowledge was once had among
the ancients and that it has been restored through modern prophets. To those who sincerely seek an understanding of
their true selves and destiny, latter-day prophets have affirmed that through truly coming to know God, men and
women may come to understand their own eternal identities and divine possibilities. In the words of Joseph Smith, "If
men do not comprehend the character of God, they do not comprehend themselves."29
------------------------------TOPICAL GUIDE
Man, Potential to Become like Heavenly Father
See also Father; Immortality; Perfection
Gen. 1: 26
(Moses 2: 26) let them have dominion.
Gen. 3: 22
(Moses 4: 28) man is become as one of us.
Lev. 19: 2
(1 Pet. 1: 16) be holy: for I . . . am holy.
Ps. 8: 5
thou hast made him a little lower than the angels.
Ps. 8: 6
madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands.
Ps. 82: 6
ye are gods, and all of you are children of the most High.
Matt. 5: 48
(3 Ne. 12: 48) Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father.
Luke 24: 39
spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
John 10: 34
(Ps. 82: 1-8; D&C 76: 58) Is it not written in your law . . . Ye are gods.
Acts 17: 29
we are the offspring of God.
Rom. 8: 17
heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ.
2 Cor. 3: 18
changed into the same image from glory to glory.
Gal. 4: 7
if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.
Eph. 4: 13
Till we all come . . . unto a perfect man.
Heb. 12: 9
be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live.
1 Jn. 3: 2
when he shall appear, we shall be like him.
Rev. 3: 21
him that overcometh will . . . sit with me in my throne.
2 Ne. 2: 25
men are, that they might have joy.
3 Ne. 9: 17
to them have I given to become the sons of God.
3 Ne. 27: 27
what manner of men ought ye to be . . . even as I am.
3 Ne. 28: 10
your joy shall be full . . . shall be even as I am.
D&C 14: 7
you shall have eternal life.
D&C 88: 29
Ye who are quickened by . . . celestial glory.
D&C 88: 107
saints shall . . . be made equal with him.
D&C 93: 20
you shall receive of his fulness, and be glorified.
D&C 93: 29
Man was also in the beginning with God.
D&C 121: 32
every man shall enter into his eternal presence.
D&C 129: 3
spirits of just men made perfect.
D&C 130: 1
he is a man like ourselves.
D&C 130: 22
Father has a body of flesh and bones.
D&C 131: 2
(D&C 131: 1-4) in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order.
D&C 132: 20
(D&C 132: 1-24) shall they be gods, because they have all power.
D&C 133: 57
that men might be made partakers of the glories.
Moses 1: 39
to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.
JS-H 1: 17
I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy.
See also 2 Tim. 2: 10—12; 1 Ne. 11: 11; D&C 50: 24.
References
1. Gen. 1: 26
26 ¶ And God said, Let aus bmake cman in our dimage, after our elikeness: and let them have fdominion over the fish of
the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that
creepeth upon the earth.
2. Gen. 3: 22
22 ¶ And the Lord God asaid, Behold, the bman is become as one of cus, to dknow good and eevil: and now, lest he put
forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
3. Lev. 19: 2
2 Speak unto all the congregation of the children of Israel, and say unto them, Ye shall be aholy: for I the Lord your God
am holy.
4. Ps. 8: 5-6
5 For thou hast made him a little alower than the bangels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.
6 Thou madest him to have adominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:
5. Ps. 82: 1-8
1 God astandeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the apersons of the wicked? Selah.
3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do ajustice to the afflicted and needy.
4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.
5 They know not, neither will they understand; they awalk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of
course.
6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are achildren of the most High.
7 But ye shall adie like men, and fall like one of the princes.
8 Arise, O God, ajudge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.
6. Matt. 5: 48
48 aBe ye therefore bperfect, even as your cFather which is in heaven is dperfect.
7. Luke 24: 39
39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: ahandle me, and see; for a bspirit hath not cflesh and bones, as ye
d
see me have.
8. John 10: 34
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are agods?
9. Acts 17: 29
29 Forasmuch then as we are the aoffspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto bgold, or silver,
or stone, graven by art and man’s cdevice.
10. Rom. 8: 17
17 And if children, then heirs; aheirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we bsuffer with him, that we may
be also glorified together.
11. 2 Cor. 3: 18
18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a aglass the bglory of the Lord, are changed into the same cimage from
d
glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.
12. Gal. 4: 7
7 Wherefore thou art no more a aservant, but a bson; and if a son, then an cheir of God through Christ.
13. Eph. 4: 13
13 Till we all come in the aunity of the faith, and of the bknowledge of the Son of God, unto a cperfect man, unto the
measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
14. 2 Tim. 2: 10, 12
10 Therefore I endure all things for the elect’s sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus
with eternal glory.
• • •
12 If we asuffer, we shall also breign with him: if we cdeny him, he also will deny us:
15. Heb. 12: 9
9 Furthermore we have had afathers of our flesh which bcorrected us, and we gave them creverence: shall we not much
rather be in dsubjection unto the eFather of fspirits, and live?
16. 1 Pet. 1: 16
16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am aholy.
17. 1 Jn. 3: 2
2 Beloved, now are we the asons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall
b
appear, we shall be clike him; for we shall dsee him as he is.
18. Rev. 3: 21
21 To him that aovercometh will I grant to bsit with me in my cthrone, even as I also overcame, and am set down with
my Father in his throne.
19. 1 Ne. 11: 11
11 And I said unto him: To know the ainterpretation thereof—for I spake unto him as a man speaketh; for I beheld that
he was in the bform of a man; yet nevertheless, I knew that it was the Spirit of the Lord; and he spake unto me as a man
speaketh with another.
20. 2 Ne. 2: 25
25 aAdam bfell that men might be; and men care, that they might have djoy.
21. 3 Ne. 9: 17
17 And as many as have received me, to them have I agiven to become the sons of God; and even so will I to as many as
shall believe on my name, for behold, by me bredemption cometh, and cin me is the dlaw of Moses fulfilled.
22. 3 Ne. 12: 48
48 Therefore I would that ye should be aperfect even as I, or your Father who is in heaven is perfect.
23. 3 Ne. 27: 27
27 And know ye that aye shall be bjudges of this people, according to the judgment which I shall give unto you, which
shall be just. Therefore, what cmanner of men ought ye to be? Verily I say unto you, even das I am.
24. 3 Ne. 28: 10
10 And for this cause ye shall have afulness of joy; and ye shall sit down in the kingdom of my Father; yea, your joy shall
be full, even as the Father hath given me fulness of joy; and ye shall be even as I am, and I am even as the Father; and
the Father and I are bone;
25. D&C 14: 7
7 And, if you akeep my commandments and bendure to the end you shall have ceternal life, which gift is the greatest of
all the gifts of God.
26. D&C 50: 24
24 That which is of God is alight; and he that breceiveth clight, and dcontinueth in God, receiveth more elight; and that
light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day.
27. D&C 76: 58
58 Wherefore, as it is written, they are agods, even the bsons of cGod—
28. D&C 88: 29, 107
29 Ye who are aquickened by a portion of the celestial bglory shall then receive of the same, even a fulness.
• • •
107 And then shall the angels be crowned with the glory of his might, and the asaints shall be filled with his bglory, and
receive their cinheritance and be made dequal with him.
29. D&C 93: 20, 29
20 For if you keep my acommandments you shall receive of his bfulness, and be cglorified in me as I am in the Father;
therefore, I say unto you, you shall receive dgrace for grace.
• • •
29 Man was also in the abeginning with God. bIntelligence, or the clight of dtruth, was not ecreated or made, neither
indeed can be.
30. D&C 121: 32
32 According to that which was aordained in the midst of the bCouncil of the Eternal cGod of all other gods before this
d
world was, that should be reserved unto the finishing and the end thereof, when every man shall enter into his eternal
e
presence and into his immortal frest.
31. D&C 129: 3
3 Secondly: the aspirits of bjust men made cperfect, they who are not resurrected, but inherit the same glory.
32. D&C 130: 1, 22
1 When the Savior shall aappear we shall see him as he is. We shall see that he is a bman like ourselves.
• • •
22 The aFather has a bbody of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of
flesh and bones, but is a personage of cSpirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not ddwell in us.
33. D&C 131: 1-4
1 In the acelestial glory there are three bheavens or degrees;
2 And in order to obtain the ahighest, a man must enter into this border of the cpriesthood [meaning the new and
d
everlasting covenant of emarriage];
3 And if he does not, he cannot obtain it.
4 He may enter into the other, but that is the end of his kingdom; he cannot have an aincrease.
34. D&C 132: 1-24
1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and
understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my
servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many awives and bconcubines—
2 Behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as touching this matter.
3 Therefore, aprepare thy heart to receive and bobey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those
who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.
4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting acovenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye
b
damned; for no one can creject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.
5 For all who will have a ablessing at my hands shall abide the blaw which was appointed for that blessing, and the
conditions thereof, as were instituted from before the foundation of the world.
6 And as pertaining to the new and aeverlasting covenant, it was instituted for the fulness of my bglory; and he that
receiveth a fulness thereof must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord God.
7 And verily I say unto you, that the aconditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations,
oaths, cvows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and dsealed
by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is eanointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy,
by frevelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold
this gpower (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this hpower in the last days, and there is never but
one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the ikeys of this priesthood are conferred), are of no efficacy, virtue,
or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when
men are dead.
b
8 Behold, mine house is a house of aorder, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion.
9 Will I aaccept of an offering, saith the Lord, that is not made in my name?
10 Or will I receive at your hands that which I have not aappointed?
11 And will I appoint unto you, saith the Lord, except it be by law, even as I and my Father aordained unto you, before
the world was?
12 I am the Lord thy God; and I give unto you this commandment—that no man shall acome unto the Father but by me
or by my word, which is my law, saith the Lord.
13 And everything that is in the world, whether it be ordained of men, by athrones, or principalities, or powers, or
things of name, whatsoever they may be, that are not by me or by my word, saith the Lord, shall be thrown down, and
shall bnot remain after men are dead, neither in nor after the resurrection, saith the Lord your God.
14 For whatsoever things remain are by me; and whatsoever things are not by me shall be shaken and destroyed.
15 Therefore, if a aman marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word, and he covenant
with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are
dead, and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world.
16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in amarriage; but are appointed angels
in bheaven, which angels are ministering cservants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an
exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.
17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly,
without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are aangels of God
forever and ever.
18 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife, and make a covenant with her for time and for all eternity, if
that acovenant is not by me or by my word, which is my law, and is not sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, through him
whom I have anointed and appointed unto this power, then it is not valid neither of force when they are out of the
world, because they are not joined by me, saith the Lord, neither by my word; when they are out of the world it cannot
be received there, because the angels and the gods are appointed there, by whom they cannot pass; they cannot,
therefore, inherit my glory; for my house is a house of order, saith the Lord God.
19 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man amarry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and
b
everlasting covenant, and it is csealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of dpromise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I
have appointed this power and the ekeys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the
first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit fthrones, kingdoms,
principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s gBook of Life, that he
shall commit no hmurder whereby to shed innocent iblood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder
whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in
time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the
angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their jexaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their
heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the kseeds forever and ever.
20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from aeverlasting to everlasting, because
they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be bgods, because
they have call power, and the angels are subject unto them.
21 Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my alaw ye cannot attain to this glory.
22 For astrait is the gate, and narrow the bway that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the clives, and few
there be that find it, because ye receive me not in the world neither do ye know me.
23 But if ye receive me in the world, then shall ye know me, and shall receive your exaltation; that awhere I am ye shall
be also.
24 This is aeternal lives—to bknow the only wise and true God, and Jesus Christ, whom he hath csent. I am he. Receive
ye, therefore, my law.
35. D&C 133: 57
57 And for this cause, that men might be made apartakers of the bglories which were to be revealed, the Lord sent forth
the fulness of his cgospel, his everlasting covenant, reasoning in plainness and simplicity—
36. Moses 1: 39
39 For behold, this is my awork and my bglory—to bring to pass the cimmortality and deternal elife of man.
37. Moses 2: 26
26 And I, God, said unto mine aOnly Begotten, which was with me from the bbeginning: Let cus dmake man in our
e
image, after our likeness; and it was so. And I, God, said: Let them have fdominion over the fishes of the sea, and over
the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the
earth.
38. Moses 4: 28
28 And I, the Lord God, asaid unto mine Only Begotten: Behold, the bman is become as one of us to cknow good and
evil; and now lest he put forth his hand and dpartake also of the etree of life, and eat and live forever,
39. JS-H 1: 17
17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself adelivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested
upon me I bsaw two cPersonages, whose brightness and dglory defy all description, estanding above me in the air. One of
them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My fBeloved gSon. Hear Him!
--------------------------------Friday, February 5, 2010
Who Authored the Mormon Couplet?
The Mormon doctrine of deity is frequently expressed in the famous couplet, "As man now is, God once was; as God
now is, man may become." Typically this couplet is attributed to Lorenzo Snow. Recently Clair Barrus argued on his blog
that Brigham Young is the true author. His argument was overstated, and he has since edited the post to soften his
conclusion. Nevertheless, Barrus highlights a fascinating discrepancy in the sources: Brigham Young and Lorenzo Snow
each claimed that this was a special revelation to himself.
Here is how Snow told the story to his sister Eliza:
The Spirit of the Lord rested mightily upon me the eyes of my understanding were opened, and I saw as clear as the sun
at noonday, with wonder and astonishment, the pathway of God and man. I formed the following couplet which
expresses the revelation, as it was shown me: "As man now is, God once was: As God now is, man may be." I felt this to
be a sacred communication, which I related to no one except my sister Eliza, until I reached England, when in a
confidential private conversation with President Brigham Young, in Manchester, I related to him this extraordinary
manifestation. (Eliza R. Snow, Biography and Family Record of Lorenzo Snow, Salt Lake City: Deseret News Co., 1884, pp.
9–10.)
This account dates Snow's revelation to 1840, just prior to his mission to England. Snow's son LeRoi later claimed that
Snow told Joseph Smith of the experience upon returning to Nauvoo in 1843, and Smith confirmed that it was a true
revelation (LeRoi C. Snow, Improvement Era, June 1919, p. 656). Possibly Snow's revelation influenced Smith's famous
King Follett Discourse, which claimed, "God himself was once as we are now . . . you have got to learn to become gods
yourselves . . . the same as all gods have done before you."
Contrary to Snow's telling of the story, however, we have the following account of an 1849 meeting where Young
claimed that he was the one to whom the couplet was revealed in England:
Brother Lorenzo Snow made some remarks on the character of Jesus Christ, and asked for light. I replied:
While on a mission to England, the following came forcibly to my mind -- As God was, so are we now; as he now is, so we
shall be.
Although Young told the story in response to a question from Snow, Snow apparently didn't jump up and shout, "You big
fat liar! That was my revelation!" So we have a puzzling dilemma. Who do we believe? And why the discrepancy?
One possibility is that Lorenzo Snow's biography misreports one or more aspects of these events. It is framed and
phrased as an autobiography, but Eliza Snow is named on the title page as the author. Additional research is required to
determine whether the work reflects the mind of Lorenzo, or merely of his sister-- and whether the claim that Lorenzo
authored the couplet is repeated in other primary sources.
Another possibility is that one or the other of these men was misremembering the course of events. Perhaps, for
example, Snow had the revelation, but Young formulated the couplet. (The fact that both men claimed revelation,
though, complicates this explanation. One wouldn't think that they'd misremember something like that.)
Alternatively, Young may have claimed the experience for himself in order to keep Snow's experience confidential, or in
order to make the doctrine authoritative. (We might imagine Young telling this story to Snow with a wink and a nudge.)
Or perhaps Young had had the same insight Snow had had, which is what sparked the conversation in Manchester in the
first place.
What is clear is that further research is required. I glanced through Snow's letters and journals on the Special Collections
DVD, but didn't turn up anything couplet-related. A search of Young's vast corpus of letters and journals might be more
fruitful, but would also be an enormously time-consuming project. But still, a mystery this important shouldn't remain
unsolved. The researcher who cracks this case will get at least a journal article out of it, so all you grad students need to
get crackin'!
------------------------------Examining the Mormon concept:
How did God become God?
by Russ Bales
The following are pertinent Mormon quotations demonstrating the Mormon belief that God progressed to godhood.
Such a belief runs contrary to the Bible which states: God is God "from everlasting to everlasting."
Psalm 90:2 Before the mountains were born or you brought forth the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting
you are God.
Mormon leaders have taught that men become Gods in the same manner as previous Mormon Gods have. Joseph Smith
stated the following:
"Here, then, is eternal life -- to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves,
and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you,... To inherit the same power, the same
glory and the same exaltation, until you arrive at the station of a God.... " (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp.
346, 347)
Christian scholar and apologist Francis Beckwith writes:
The modern Mormon concept of God can best be grasped by understanding the overall Mormon world view and how
the deity fits into it. Mormonism teaches that God the Father is a resurrected, "exalted" human being named Elohim
who was at one time not God. Rather, he was once a mortal man on another planet who, through obedience to the
precepts of his God, eventually attained exaltation, or godhood, himself through "eternal progression." Beckwith
Beckwith's perception is understandable in light of LDS leaders' statements. For example:
Milton R. Hunter, a member of Mormonism's First Council of the Seventy, wrote in The Gospel Through the Ages, p 104:
"Mormon prophets have continuously taught the sublime truth that God the Eternal Father was once a mortal man who
passed through a school of earth life similar to that through which we are now passing. He became God - an exalted
being - through obedience to the same eternal Gospel truths that we are given opportunity today to obey."
Hunter, also writes:
"We accept the fact that God is the Supreme Intelligent Being in the universe. He has the greatest knowledge, the most
perfect will, and the most infinite power of any person within the realm of our understanding." "Then how did He
become glorified and exalted and attain His present status of Godhood? In the first place, aeons ago God undoubtedly
took advantage of every opportunity to learn the laws of truth and as He became acquainted with each new verity He
righteously obeyed it. From day to day He exerted His will vigorously, and as a result became thoroughly acquainted
with the forces lying about Him. As he gained more knowledge through persistent effort and continuous industry, as
well as through absolute obedience, His understanding of the universal laws continued to become more complete. Thus
He grew in experience and continued to grow until He attained the status of Godhood. In other words, He became God
by absolute obedience to all the eternal laws of the Gospel by conforming His actions to all truth, and thereby became
the author of eternal truth. Therefore, the road that the Eternal Father followed to Godhood was one of living at all
times a dynamic, industrious, and completely righteous life. There is no other way to exaltation."
Hunter further wrote in the chapter, How Men May Become Gods:
"Thus all men who ascend to the glorious status of Godhood can do so only by one method - by obedience to all the
principles and ordinances of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If to obtain eternal life means to enjoy the same type of life that
God lives and to experience similar experiences, then those people who receive it to the fullest degree shall actually be
Gods." (The Gospel Through The Ages, pp. 114-117)
An official publication of the LDS Church states:
As shown in this chapter, our Father in heaven was once a man as we are now, capable of physical death. By obedience
to eternal gospel principles, he progressed from one stage of life to another until he attained the state that we call
exaltation or godhood. In such a condition, he and our mother in heaven were empowered to give birth to spirit children
whose potential was equal to that of their heavenly parents. We are those spirit children. (Achieving a Celestial
Marriage p 132)
A former President of the LDS Church stated:
Some people are troubled over the statements of the prophet Joseph Smith…the matter that seems such a mystery is
the statement that our Father in heaven at one time passed through a life and a death and is an exalted man. This is one
of the mysteries….the Prophet taught that our father had a father and so on. Is not this a reasonable thought, especially
when we remember that the promises are made to us that we may become like him? -Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines
of Salvation, 1: 10,12 as quoted at http://www.isca-apologetics.org/groza-atheists.pdf
How did the other Mormon Gods become Gods? In part by celestial marriage -- a mandatory Mormon ordinance. Some
Mormon authorities have insisted God and Jesus were both married:
"This doctrine that there is a Mother in Heaven was affirmed in plainness by the First Presidency of the Church (Joseph
F. Smith, John R. Winder, and Anthon H. Lund) when, in speaking of pre-existence and the origin of man, they said that
'man, as a spirit, was begotten and born of heavenly parents, and reared to maturity in the eternal mansions of the
Father,' that man is the 'offspring of celestial parentage,' and that 'all men and women are in the similitude of the
universal Father and Mother, and are literally the sons and daughters of Deity.'" (emphasis added) Mormon Doctrine, p.
516 by LDS Elder, and later LDS Apostle, Bruce R. McConkie.
"I discover that some of the Eastern papers represent me as a great blasphemer, because I said, in my lecture on
Marriage, at our last Conference, that Jesus Christ was married at Cana of Galilee, that Mary, Martha, and others were
his wives, and that he begat children." Journal of Discourses 2:210, Orson Hyde, March 18, 1855
Families are forever in Mormonism and occur naturally through mandatory Mormon marriage:
"The birth of the Savior was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of
flesh and blood -- was begotten of his Father as we were of our fathers." (Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, p. 115)
"Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers." (Mormon
Doctrine, 1979, p. 547)
"Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have been associated together in the capacity
of Husband and Wife; hence the Virgin Mary must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father;...
Inasmuch as God was the first husband to her, it may be that He only gave her to be the wife of Joseph while in this
mortal state, and that He intended after the resurrection to again take her as one of his own wives to raise up immortal
spirits in eternity." (LDS Apostle Orson Pratt's The Seer, 1853, p. 158)
"...the great Messiah who was the founder of the Christian religion, was a polygamist,... the Messiah chose to take upon
himself his seed; and by marrying many honorable wives himself, show to all future generations that he approbated the
plurality of Wives...God the Father had a plurality of wives .... the Son followed the example of his Father, and became
the great Bridegroom to whom kings' daughters and many honorable Wives were to be married. We have also proved
that both God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ inherit their wives in eternity as well in time;..." (ibid, p. 172)
Are we to assume that Jesus was a polygamist with children? There's no biblical support for such belief. But do such LDS
doctrines hold true today? Even the LDS president hedges and equivocates on matters of important theological issues.
Regarding the well-known LDS couplet "As man is, God once was; as God is, man may be," LDS President, Gordon B.
Hinckley said:
"I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it... I understand the philosophical background behind it,
but I don't know a lot about it, and I don't think others know a lot about it." (Time, Aug. 4, 1997)
But as we've seen, many other LDS authorities do know a great deal about how God became God.
LDS Apostle James Talmage wrote, "We believe in a God who is Himself progressive, whose majesty is intelligence;
whose perfection consists in eternal advancement - a Being who has attained His exalted state by a path which now
His children are permitted to follow, whose glory it is their heritage to share. In spite of the opposition of the sects, in
the face of direct charges of blasphemy, the church proclaims the eternal truth: 'As man is, God once was; as God is,
man may be.'" (emphasis added) (Articles of Faith James Talmadge, p. 430)
It's difficult to believe that a president of the LDS Church past or present knows little of how "God became God" when
his predecessors assure us that they know much about the path they must follow if they desire to achieve Mormon
exaltation.
----------------------------------Can Man Become God?
By Kurt Van Gorden
The Christian panel takes the negative position on the question before us, "Can man progress to godhood?" As with any
sound presentation, one needs to define the terms of the resolution.
The term man carries its normal and natural sense. By this I mean human beings, homo sapiens, both male and female.
The verb progress carries the sense of advancement toward a goal.
The word godhood means the state of being god.
There are three ways the Mormon panel could attempt to prove this resolution true. The first is biblical evidence
understood by literal historical-grammatical hermeneutics. The opposition must prove the bible teaches the affirmative
of this resolution, since this is a theological debate. The second possible way for the opposition to prove its case is
logically. If it can be shown that man logically progresses to godhood, as perhaps a child advances logically to adulthood,
then my opponents could prove their point. The third possible way for the Mormon panel to win this point is historical
evidence. If one can point to any verifiable case where a man has become a god, then we would concede the point.
We take the negative position and intend to prove our position by showing the impossibility of the contrary. We believe
it is impossible to establish any one of the tests available -- the biblical, the logical, or the historical.
In recent years I have noticed a number of articles in Mormon literature concerning the Eastern Orthodox doctrine of
deification, derived from the Greek term theosis. There are two logical linguistic fallacies the Mormon writers have
committed concerning their use of Eastern Orthodox citations. First, they commit the fallacy of equivocation, pretending
that the early Church fathers meant the same thing the Mormons do when they use similar terms. Second, they commit
the fallacy of vicious abstraction, that is, the removal of a statement from its context and the changing of its argument.
The Mormon doctrine of man reaching godhood is outlined by the Mormon apostle John A. Widtsoe, in his work A
Rational Theology. He explicitly states, "In short, man is a god in embryo. He comes of a race of gods, and as his eternal
growth continues, he will approach more nearly the position which to us is Godhood, and is everlasting in its power over
the elements of the universe." He also said, "God and Man are of the same race . . . man is of the order of Gods. . . . "
Several Mormon writers have attempted to quote early Church fathers to support their doctrine of man progressing to
godhood. B. H. Roberts, Hugh Nibley, Keith Norman, Philip Barlow, Steven Robinson, and Van Hale are a few who have
popularized this method of association. The whole system crumbles on two accounts: equivocation of terms and taking
statements out of context.
Two typical examples are quotes from Tertullian and Origen. Van Hale uses both of these in his note cards (#227 and
#348). His introduction states,
Eternal Progression deification (Tertullian, 145-220 A.D.)
Source: "Against Hermongenes," chap. 5, Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1978) 3:480. The
following is one of several statements by Tertullian expressing a view quite widely held by early Christians that man has
the potential of becoming gods. This is part of his treatise against Hermogenes whom Tertullian believed to be a heretic.
His interpretation of the 2 verses from Psalms was also common. While he and the LDS would disagree on many points,
on this point there seems to be considerable agreement.
Then Hale quotes Tertullian,
. . . "We shall be even gods, if we shall deserve to be among those of whom He declared, 'I have said, Ye are gods,'" (Ps.
82:6) and, "God standeth in the congregation of the gods." (Ps. 82:1). But this comes of His own grace, not from any
property in us, because it is He who can make gods.
Again, a note card heading reads,
Eternal Progression deification (Origen, 230 A.D.)
Source: Origen, "De Principiis, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979), p. 344-345. This statement
of Origen, one of the greatest early Christian writers, is from his discussion of the end of the world written about 230
A.D.
Van's point on deification is, "The highest good, then, after the attainment of which the whole of rational nature is
seeking, which is also called the end of all blessings, is defined by many philosophers as follows: The highest good, they
say, is to become as like to God as possible."
Then Mr. Hale proceeds to quote Origen on the image and likeness of God in man. The fallacy of vicious abstraction is
apparent when we read in both Tertullian and Origen's writings the contextual opposite of Mormon godhood doctrine.
Mormonism teaches that humans are of the same species as God and can progress to become a god in the same manner
that the Father did, since He is but an exalted man from another planet in their doctrines.
However, the deification doctrine of Tertullian, Origen, and Eastern Orthodoxy teaches that there is but one true eternal
God and he imparts communicable attributes only, like immortality, love, and holiness to the redeemed. Never is God an
exalted man in any writing of early Church fathers. Never does God impart his incommunicable, unique attributes of
eternity, omniscience, omnipresence, or omnipotence to the resurrected believer.
One merely needs to read Tertullian's chapter previous where Van Hal extracted his quote to discover that Tertullian
taught monotheism. He said, "For what other estimate of God is there than eternity? . . . if it can be ascribed to any
other being, it will no longer be the property of God." Here, the proper context of Tertullian shows exclusive attributes
that will forever separate God from man.
The same is true with Origen. The paragraph following the quote on Mr. Hales note card says, "He who alone is the one
good God becomes to him [the believer] all."
Aside from context, the fallacy of equivocation must be avoided. Many of these Mormon writers assume that the Church
father meant the same thing with their terms as what Mormons do. One Mormon writer, for example, who was
evidently disturbed that this was going on, cautioned Mormons to be careful about using quotes on deification and
theosis. Philip Barlow said, "There is obviously a sense in which the various deification allusions here considered have
only verbal similarities to Mormon understandings of exaltation. I therefore do not wish to be misunderstood as
implying that any or all of the thinkers referred to herein thought of theosis just as the Mormons do."
It is impossible to show that man can progress to godhood on a logical basis if the terms man and God have any real or
ontologically distinct meanings.
It is impossible to show that man can progress to godhood on a historical basis, because we have no examples of a man
who has done so.
Our final category is that of the biblical teaching. I will demonstrate the impossibility of man progressing to godhood
both from verses affirming absolute monotheism and from verses showing the uniqueness of the one true God's
attributes.
My conviction that progression to godhood is impossible for man is based partly on the biblical teaching concerning the
nature of God. The Bible expressly affirms absolute monotheism, or that only one true god exists:
Deuteronomy 4:35: "To you it was shown, that you might know that the Lord Himself is God; there is none other besides
Him."
Isaiah 40:25: "To whom then will you liken Me, or to whom shall I be equal?" says the Holy One.
Isaiah 43:10: "You are my witnesses," says the Lord, "And My servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and
believe Me, and understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, nor shall there be after Me."
Isaiah 44:6: "Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts, 'I am the First and I am the Last;
Besides Me there is no God.'"
Isaiah 45:21-22: "Tell and bring forth your case; Yes, let them take counsel together, Who has declared this from ancient
time? Who has told it from that time? Have not I, the Lord? And there is no other God besides Me, a just God and a
Savior; there is none besides Me."
Isaiah 46:9: "Remember the former things of old, for I am God and there is no other, I am God and there is none like
Me."
The God described in these passages, the only true God, is qualitatively unique. There can be no other gods at any stage
of development who are at all qualitatively like Him. Some of the unique attributes of God are described by the
following verses:
Creation: "Thus shall you say to them: 'The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth shall perish from the
earth and from under these heavens'" (Jeremiah 10:11).
Unique Glory: "I am the Lord, that is My name; and My glory I will not give to another, nor My praise to graven images"
(Isaiah 42:8).
Omnipotent (the Almighty): "I am almighty God; walk before Me and be blameless" (Genesis 17:1).
Alone worthy of worship: "You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve" (Matthew 4:10 cf.
Deuteronomy 6:13; 10:20).
The almighty God described in the Bible is uncreated, eternal, not a product of progression and not Himself progressing:
"For I am the Lord, I do not change; Therefore you are not consumed, O sons of Jacob" (Malachi 3:6). His will, so unlike
that of any man (or so-called "god in embryo"), never changes or wavers: "God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a
son of man, that He should repent. Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?"
(Numbers 23:19). The true God "inhabits eternity" (Isaiah 57:15), He does not merely keep one step ahead of his created
subjects.
On this basis, that there is only one true, unique, and uncreated God, I believe it is impossible to affirm the proposition,
"Can man progress to godhood?" This is why we deny this proposition.
-------------------------------Gordon Hinckley Hearkens Back to Old Time Mormonism While De-Emphasizing Human Exaltation
07/15/2006 - James White
When you go to www.lds.org today you will find a "First Presidency Message" from Gordon Hinckley,
printed in the Ensign magazine, July, 2006. Since this is the current prophet writing, being published in
the official church publications, and being recommended for use and discussion by home teachers, there
is little ground upon which anyone can question that this is official teaching. Not Scripture, but official
interpretation thereof, a clear exposition of the official position of the LDS Church. If the prophet can
make this kind of statement for the First Presidency in the church's official publications and it still just be
his "private opinion," there is really no logical way to determine what Mormonism actually believes or teaches any
longer.
I found this message most interesting. In many ways, it is a re-affirmation of "old time Mormonism," those beliefs that
some LDS seem to at least be embarrassed about today, and even to be waffling on, in some instances. Hinckley
confirms, at least positively, the majority of what I presented in my book, Is the Mormon My Brother, though
conspicuous by its absence is the historic emphasis upon man's own exaltation to the status of a god. Though this is not
the specific subject of the message, that part would not have been missed sixty years ago. And at one point, it almost
looks like an effort was made to avoid the topic. We read early on:
"It is the first principle of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of God" (History of the Church, 6:305).
Notice there is no period in the citation. That's because it is a partial sentence. Here's the whole thing:
It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the Character of God, and to know that we may converse
with him as one man converses with another, and that he was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us
all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did" (King Follett Funeral Discourse).
The original emphasis in the cited text was upon the fact that God "was once a man like us," leading to the teaching that
we may become gods like him. So while much of this statement seems to me to be aimed at Mormons who are
speculating more and more about abandoning certain elements of LDS theology that are embarrassing (polytheism as a
religious viewpoint is incoherent and self-contradictory in any form), it still reflects the modern situation where the
emphasis has shifted, at least in Hinckley's official statements, away from the old-time LDS emphasis upon exaltation to
godhood. What is clear is that Hinckley sees no room for Mormonism to adopt historic Christian beliefs regarding the
unity of the Godhead on an ontological level. The plurality of gods stays, even if the corollary doctrine (exaltation) is not
nearly as strongly asserted. Notice the following statement:
I believe without equivocation or reservation in God the Eternal Father. He is my Father, the Father of my spirit, and the
Father of the spirits of all men. He is the great Creator, the Ruler of the universe. He directed the Creation of this earth
on which we live. In His image man was created. He is personal. He is real. He is individual. He has "a body of flesh and
bones as tangible as man's" (D&C 130:22).
The person familiar with LDS theology knows well what these words mean, though those who are not well read in
Mormon teaching would tend to read these statements in an orthodox (Christian) fashion. When Hinckley says God is
the "Father of my spirit" he means that literally: his God, in a "body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's," begat his
spirit with one of God's heavenly wives, so that Hinckley pre-existed his mortal life in a spirit existence in heaven. All
men pre-existed in this fashion. Note that God "directed the creation of this earth," not that He made all things, for the
LDS God cannot in fact create anything at all. He can only organize pre-existing matter, and even here, he did so by
directing Jehovah (Jesus) and Michael to organize the earth (contra Isaiah 44:24). But since he himself once lived upon
an earth himself, he cannot be confessed to be the Creator of all things, only those things "pertaining to this earth." And
Hinckley continues to emphasize the anthropomorphic nature of the LDS God (or as one LDS acquaintance of mine puts
it, the theomorphic view of man) with the citation of D&C 130:22, a text familiar to all who evangelize the LDS people.
That he is emphasizing the physical nature of God is clear, for he goes on to say,
Could any language be more explicit? Does it demean God, as some would have us believe, that man was created in His
express image? Rather, it should stir within the heart of every man and woman a greater appreciation for himself or
herself as a son or daughter of God.
Given the biblical denial that God is, in fact, a man (Hosea 11:9), or limited to time and space as man is, yes, it is
demeaning to God to say he is an exalted man from another planet. The imago Dei is not a physical image at all, and I
would say it is demeaning to the true nature of that image (that which distinguishes us from the animals, and allows us
to have communion with God) to limit it to the physical, as Hinckley does here.
Christians who recognize the danger of man-centered theology (as seen in modern evangelicalism's mad rush to please
fallen men while ignoring the glory and honor of God) cannot help but see how this danger comes to full bloom in
Mormonism. Consider, for example, Hinckley's comment, "His love is greater than the love of any other, for His love
encompasses all of His children, and it is His work and His glory to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of His
sons and daughters of all generations (see Moses 1:39)." One does wonder how those who promote an unbiblically
balanced concept of "omnibenevolence" respond to such an assertion. In any case, here God's very glory is made
dependent upon the exaltation of his "sons and daughters," i.e., defined by their own achieving of godhood. How utterly
unlike Christianity Mormonism is at its most foundational levels.
Well, I did not intend to write a paper here. Let's pick up the pace and look at some of the other key statements from
this recent message from the LDS First Presidency:
I stand in awe and reverence and gratitude for His appearance in this dispensation when, as He introduced the risen
Lord to one who had sought Him in prayer, the Father declared: "This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!" (Joseph Smith—
History 1:17).
This is a reference to the First Vision, one of the key elements of Mormonism that is simply impossible to make
compatible with biblical Christianity.
I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the eternal, living God. I believe in Him as the Firstborn of the Father and the
Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh. I believe in Him as an individual, separate and distinct from His Father.
Historic LDS theology once again. Christ is a separate god, the first begotten of the Father in the spirit realm, and the
only begotten in the physical realm (note the all-important phrase "in the flesh"). Hinckley is old enough to know well
the universal teaching of the physical fatherhood of Jesus by the Father (yes, via sexual union with Mary), and how, in
priesthood meetings, this is the explanation of how Jesus could be immortal, for he had a mortal mother but an
immortal father (hence his ability to take his life back). This is surely one of the most embarrassing elements of LDS
teaching, any many at BYU have already repudiated it, relegating it to nothing more than 19th century "speculation." But
Hinckley was quite clear: "I believe that He was born of Mary of the lineage of David as the promised Messiah, that He
was in very deed begotten of the Father...." Any honest LDS person knows what he is saying.
Next, listen carefully to the following statement, and ask yourself, "How many Christians would possess the
discernment to see where this is in error?"
I believe that through His atoning sacrifice, the offering of His life on Calvary's Hill, He expiated the sins of mankind,
relieving us from the burden of sin if we will forsake evil and follow Him. I believe in the reality and the power of His
Resurrection. I believe in the grace of God made manifest through His sacrifice and redemption, and I believe that
through His Atonement, without any price on our part, each of us is offered the gift of resurrection from the dead. I
believe further that through that sacrifice there is extended to every man and woman, every son and daughter of God,
the opportunity for eternal life and exaltation in our Father's kingdom, as we hearken to and obey His commandments.
Sound just slightly familiar? It should. An historical Arminian would not have the first bit of problem with that
statement, though, of course, it needs to be read within its Mormon context. You need to understand the difference
between general salvation (which equals resurrection) and individual salvation (exaltation). But still, all in all, this kind of
universal atonement language is very much a common ground for most evangelicals today. But surely not for those who
believe in substitutionary atonement and the perfection of the work of the cross.
Mormonism's continued rejection of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity is stated clearly in this message. But at the
same time, one is left wondering whether Gordon Hinckley actually understands the doctrine he rejects any better than
most Mormons do. The possibility truly does exist that he managed to get into the upper echelons of Mormonism
without ever encountering anyone who could disabuse him of his modalistic interpretation of the doctrine. Under the
subtitle "Three Distinct Beings" Hinckley asserts,
I am aware that Jesus said they who had seen Him had seen the Father. Could not the same be said by many a son who
resembles his parent?
When Jesus prayed to the Father, certainly He was not praying to Himself!
They are distinct beings, but They are one in purpose and effort. They are united as one in bringing to pass the grand,
divine plan for the salvation and exaltation of the children of God.
This is surely the objection you hear from 19 year old LDS missionaries, but is it possible Hinckley himself does not
understand the difference between modalism and Trinitarianism? One truly wonders. The difference between being and
person is lost on him, leading him to make objections that are irrelevant to the actual doctrine of the Trinity. But the fact
that Hinckley, as the Prophet of the LDS Church, remains thoroughly polytheistic (LDS prefer the phrase "plurality of
gods" but there is no real functional difference) even at the end of his life. He may be more "careful" about how he
presents it, but Mormonism remains as far removed from Christianity at its most basic level as it was in the days of
Joseph Smith or Brigham Young.
--------------------------God Was Once a Man Like Us : Finessing an Off-Putting Mormon Doctrine
By Joel B. Groat
Copyright © 2006 Institute for Religious Research. All rights reserved.
Introduction
Joseph Smith apparently wanted to set his followers straight when he proclaimed the following at the Mormon Church's
General Conference in April, 1844:
I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I
will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see. … It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a
certainty the character of God and to know...that he was once a man like us.... (“King Follett Discourse,” Journal of
Discourses 6:3-4, also in Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 345-346, and History of the Church, vol. 6, 305-307,
emphasis added)
“It is a ‘Mormon’ truism that is current among us and we all accept it, that as man is God once was and as God is man
may become.” (Melvin J. Ballard – Mormon Apostle General Conf. address, April 6, 1921)
Q: ... Don’t Mormons believe that God was once a man?
A. Hinckley: “I wouldn’t say that. ... That gets into some pretty deep theology that we don’t know very much about.”
(Interview -Mormon Pres. Gordon B. Hinckley, San Francisco Chronicle, April 13, 1997)
Subsequent Mormon leaders have been just as clear, like General Authority Milton R. Hunter, who wrote:
Mormon prophets have continuously taught the sublime truth that God the Eternal Father was once a mortal man who
passed through a school of earth life similar that through which we are now passing (The Gospel Through the Ages,
1945, p 104).
But recently I’ve noticed changes — changes in what Mormon Missionaries teach investigators, changes in Mormon
teaching manuals, changes in what Mormon people say about their own Church’s doctrine.
Ask the Missionaries
What is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon) teaching its members about who God is and what He is
like? Does it teach non-members anything different? To find out I called two different Mormon missionary residences in
my city. At the first number Elder Fieldcrest1 answered the phone. He was cordial and very willing to answer my
questions on the nature of God. I asked two:
The first was, “Has God always been God, complete with all attributes of omnipotence, omnipresence, and
omniscience?” His answer was “Yes. God has always been God.”
My next question was equally straightforward: “Was God once a man like us?” His immediate answer was “No.” When I
asked does the Mormon Church teach that God was once a man, he said “No.” He went on to say that there is no
specific teaching on that. God does have a body of flesh and bones, but he was never a man like us.
Two hours later I received a call back from the other missionary residence where I had left a message. This time I talked
with Sister Sansburg. I asked her the same two questions. To the question “Has God always been God?” there was a
pause and then “No. God was once a man.” I then asked, “So does the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teach
that God was once man like us?” To which, after a slightly longer pause, she answered “Yes.”
Two Mormon missionaries, trained at the same Missionary Training Center in Provo, Utah, working in the same city, but
they gave two very different answers to these important questions on the nature of God. What’s happening? I believe it
is the result of a deliberate attempt on the part of Mormon leaders to cloak certain teachings that are disturbing to nonmembers and investigators of the Church. Teachings like:

God the Father has not always been God, but was once a man like us

God had to “progress” to his current status of godhood

Men (but only Mormon men) can progress to be Gods like Heavenly Father
During the course of my conversation with Sister Sansburg I found out she had been raised Mormon. I assumed this was
why she so openly and candidly spoke about God having been a man. I was wrong. Instead she told me she had assumed
all her life God had always been God, but it was only while she was on her mission that she learned God was once a man
who had progressed to Godhood. It was a “deep doctrine” (her words) that she learned from fellow missionaries during
private discussions. She made it clear that as Mormon missionaries they never teach this doctrine to investigators, nor
was it ever taught to the missionaries during her missionary training.
The evidence indicates that in recent years the Mormon Church has become aware that the non-LDS public is
uncomfortable and even offended with its long-standing doctrinal teaching that God the Father was once a man like us.
It would appear that this and related teachings, ie. men can progress to become Gods, is a hindrance to the growth of
the Mormon Church, and has led to the deliberate withholding of this information from nonmembers and even its own
missionaries. How important is this issue? To answer that question this article will look at three related areas:

How important is a correct understanding of the nature of God?

Has the teaching that God was once a man like us been a core or central doctrine of the Mormon Church
historically speaking?

What evidence indicates that the Mormon church will neither repudiate this doctrine, nor openly admit it or
teach it to non-members?
I will conclude the article with some recommendations on how Christians can more effectively approach Mormon
people in light of this information.
Does it Matter What You Believe?
Having a truly biblical understanding of the nature of God, knowing who He has revealed himself to be, is at the heart of
what it means to be an evangelical Christian. For those who accept the authority of the Bible, it is not only important
that we be restored to a right relationship with God, but that we are in relationship with the right God – the One True
God who has disclosed himself in the Bible. This is underscored in passages like Isaiah 45:18, 21:
I am the Lord and there is no other … there is no God apart from me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none but me.
Turn to me and be saved all you ends of the earth; for I am God and there is no other.
Turn to the wrong God, or a man-made god and you miss out on salvation, for authentic faith requires knowledge of the
true Gospel and the One True God.
Consider Acts 4:24 where upon the release of Peter and John from jail, the people raise there voices together in prayer
to God, “Sovereign Lord, you made the heavens and the earth and everything in them.” Prior to that Peter and John said
“Salvation is found in none other” (Acts 4:12).
LDS people who are theologically inclined would agree. Mormon General Authority, Bruce R. McConkie, stated clearly
and emphatically:
There is no salvation in worshiping a false god—neither a cow; nor a crocodile; nor a cedar post; nor even a spirit
essence, without body, parts, or passions, that fills the immensity of space. (Bruce R. McConkie, “The Caravan Moves
On,” Ensign, Nov. 1984, 82, emphasis added)
Yet many Mormons appear to have little concern for how accurate their or another person’s concept of God is. That is
because within Mormonism, one’s concept of God is increasingly less important to one’s identity, acceptance or
significance within the Mormon culture or community. One’s personal understanding of the nature of God beyond the
fact that He is personal and our Father in Heaven, seems of lessening significance within the theological and social
system of Mormonism. I must note here, however, that the Mormon Church does continue to emphasize that God the
Father has a body of flesh and bones.
What has happened to the teaching that God was once a man like us? Was it ever really an important doctrine, or was it
simply, as Elder Fieldcrest explained, an idea held by some early Mormons, but never specifically taught?
History of the Teaching – LDS Leaders Speak
Joseph Smith, revered as the founding prophet of the Mormon Church, first publicly taught that “God himself was once
as we are now” and that men would have “to learn how to be Gods” in 1844. He did so toward the end of his life and
heralded it as both a distinctive doctrine of Mormonism and a departure from the previously accepted truth about God
the Father. According to Joseph Smith, to know for a certainty the character of God was “the first principle of the
Gospel,” leaving little doubt as to its importance and centrality. It should be no surprise then, that subsequent Mormon
leaders have consistently taught and affirmed this teaching up until recent years. What follows are quotes from Mormon
leaders.
Joseph Smith – Prophet, President
God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted Man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens. That is the great
secret... …I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all
eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see. … It is the first principle of the Gospel to
know for a certainty the character of God and to know...that he was once a man like us.... Here, then, is eternal life - to
know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to
God, the same as all Gods have done before you... (“King Follett Discourse,” Journal of Discourses 6:3-4, also in Teachings
of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 345-346, and History of the Church, vol. 6, 305-307, emphasis added)
Following Joseph’s death, several leaders vied for the right to lead the church. Among the issues that divided them,
beside their competing claims to be Joseph’s legitimate successor, were Joseph’s secret teaching and practice of
polygamy and Joseph’s recently introduced concept that God had not always been God, but was a once a man.
Eventually, a sizable number of Latter day Saints, including Joseph’s widow Emma, joined together in following Joseph’s
oldest living son, Joseph Smith III. This movement, the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, broke
with all the doctrinal innovations of the Nauvoo period, rejecting as unbiblical, polygamy, plurality of Gods, the
elaborate Masonic-based temple ceremonies introduced to help men progress to being Gods, as well as the Book of
Abraham.
The great majority of Mormons, however, united under the leadership of Brigham Young, who at Joseph’s death was
head of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. Young embraced Joseph’s teachings on plural wives, plurality of Gods, and
temple ordinances leading to godhood and continued to promote these among the Latter-day Saints he led west.
Brigham Young – Prophet, 2nd President
He [God] is our Father - the Father of our spirits, and was once a man in mortal flesh as we are, and is now an exalted
being. (Journal of Discourses 7:333)
The Lord created you and me for the purpose of becoming Gods like himself. (Journal of Discourses 3:93)
George Q. Cannon – First Presidency
Well, who was His [Jesus’] father? Why God was His father; and who was God’s father? Why God had a father like you
and I have. …
Heavenly Father once a mortal man. Every child knows that its earthly father had a father, and its grandfather had a
father, and so on back as far as they can be traced; it can believe also that if it lives to become a man or a woman, it will
also have children.
The Prophet Joseph teaches us that our Heavenly Father was once a man and dwelt on an earth like we do upon this one
and that He has gone on from step to step, from one degree of glory and exaltation to another, until He now rules and
governs. (George Q. Cannon, Gospel Truth: Discourses and Writings of President George Q. Cannon, selected, arranged,
and edited by Jerreld L. Newquist [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1987], 101.)
Elder Melvin J. Ballard – Apostle
“It is a ‘Mormon’ truism that is current among us and we all accept it, that as man is God once was and as God is man
may become.” (General Conference address, April 6, 1921)
Milton R. Hunter – General Authority
Mormon prophets have continuously taught the sublime truth that God the Eternal Father was once a mortal man who
passed through a school of earth life similar that through which we are now passing. He became God – an exalted being
– through obedience to the same eternal Gospel truths that we are given opportunity today to obey. (The Gospel
Through the Ages, 1945, p 104).
In June, 1840, Lorenzo Snow formulated the following the famous couplet: “As man is, God once was; as God is, man
may become.” This doctrine, when first announced by the Prophet and later restated by Elder Snow, was astounding to
Christendom, since the teachers as well as the laity had long ago ceased to regard man as being of such magnitude. Even
today it is still a doctrine understood primarily by members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (The
Gospel Through the Ages, 1945, p 105-106).
Hunter supports his affirmation that Mormon prophets have continuously taught this sublime truth by citing such LDS
leaders Joseph F. Smith, Orson Hyde and Daniel H. Wells.
Joseph Fielding Smith – Prophet, 10th President
God is an exalted man. Some people are troubled over the statements of the Prophet Joseph Smith ... that our Father in
heaven at one time passed through a life and death and is an exalted man... (Doctrines of Salvation 1:10, 1954)
Bruce R. McConkie - Apostle
...God...is a personal Being, a holy and exalted man... (Mormon Doctrine, 1966 edition p. 250)
Other Mormons Speak
While the following quotes are not from LDS spiritual leadership, they indicate that some Mormon apologists and
academics acknowledge this Mormon teaching on the nature of God.
Michael Fordham (Mormon apologist)
Everything Latter-day Saints teach about God is in agreement with the rest of the Christian world, with the exception of
His nature (Mormon apologist Michael W. Fordham, “Does Gordon B. Hinckley Understand Mormon Doctrine?”
(http://www.fairlds.org/apol/misc/misc09.html emphasis added).
Robert L. Millet (Professor, Brigham Young University)
Knowing what we know concerning God our Father — that he is a personal being; that he has a body of flesh and bones
as tangible as our own; that he is an exalted and glorified being; that he was once a man and dwelt on an earth - and
knowing that this knowledge was had by many of the ancients, should we be surprised to find legends and myths
throughout the cultures of the earth concerning gods who have divine power but human attributes and passions? (BYU
Professor Robert L. Millet, “The Eternal Gospel,” Ensign, July 1996, pg.53 emphasis added)2
Books and Periodicals
Achieving a Celestial Marriage, 1976, p. 129. GOD WAS ONCE A MORTAL MAN (1-2) He lived on an Earth like Our Own.
“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great
secret.”
Temple Preparation Seminar Discussions, 1978, p. 8. Man is the child of God, formed in the divine image and endowed
with divine attributes, and even as the infant son of an earthly father and mother is capable in due time of becoming a
man, so the undeveloped offspring of celestial parentage is capable, by experience through ages and aeons, of evolving
into a God.” (Joseph F. Smith, John R Winder, and Anthon H. Lund, Messages of the First Presidency, James R. Clark, ed.,
Bookcraft, 4:203, 205-6.)
Gospel Principles, 1978, p. 6. What Kind of Being is God? The Prophet Joseph Smith said: “If the veil were rent today,
and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all the worlds and all things by his power, was to
make himself visible—I say, if you were to see him today you would see him like a man in form…” (Teachings of the
Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345). God is a glorified and perfected man, a personage of flesh and bones. Inside his tangible
body is an eternal spirit (see D&C 130:22)
Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young (published by the church as an official lesson manual 1997 [text
“approved 10/95”], p. 29):
President Brigham Young taught ... that God the Father was once a man on another planet who 'passed the ordeals we
are now passing through...
Presidents of the Church, Student Manual, Religion 345, chapter 5, “Lorenzo Snow,” copyright 2003, p. 88.
[Subhead] He Received a Revelation About Man’s Divine Potential
… the Spirit of the Lord rested mightily upon me—the eyes of my understanding were opened, and I saw as clear as the
sun at noon-day, with wonder and astonishment, the pathway of God and man. I formed the following couplet which
expresses the revelation, as it was shown me … As man now is, God once was: As God now is, man may be.
Note this famous couplet is heralded as a “revelation” from God given to the 5th President and Prophet of the Mormon
Church.3
Ensign magazine, January 2006 (an official publication of the Mormon Church)
In an article titled “The Nature of the Godhead” LDS Apostle Elder Dallin Oaks is quoted:
The Prophet Joseph Smith once taught: “It is the first principle of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of
God, … that he was once a man like us …” (Ensign, January 2006, p. 51).4
This sampling, though brief, is enough to demonstrate that key teachings like the following are core doctrines:

God the Father was once a man like us

God progressed to Godhood, and that

Men likewise can evolve into Gods
These concepts have been consistently taught since the days of Joseph Smith. These teachings not only define the
Mormon Church’s beliefs on the nature of God, but also render the Mormon belief system decidedly not-Christian. In
fact, in this area, Mormonism is as different from historic Christianity as other recognized non-Christian religious
traditions such as Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam. Because most people with a Judaeo-Christian background recognize
the non-Christian nature of these beliefs, there is an immediate tension created when the Mormon Church introduces
these unbiblical, unChristian teachings and at the same time claims to be a Christian Church, indeed, the only Christian
Church.
Keep the Investigators Comfortable
I suggest that this increasing tension has been a catalyst for an increasingly dishonest portrayal of Mormon beliefs to the
public in general and to potential converts more specifically. In an attempt to minimize the tension and keep
investigators comfortable while they learn about the Mormon Church, Mormon leaders have omitted disturbing, nonChristian teachings from their official manuals, public discourses, missionary training, pageants and temple open houses
and both official and unofficial websites. Even the current Mormon President has been less than forthright in public
interviews on this subject.
1. Books and Manuals
Gospel Principles is a teaching manual of the Mormon Church, published continuously in various editions since 1978.
This 47 chapter manual is studied, in a Sunday School class format, chapter by chapter throughout the year to teach the
fundamentals of the LDS faith to new members and investigators. This section will highlight some of the changes made
to various editions that are relevant to the subject of this paper and suggest why these are significant.
Gospel Principles, 1978
Chapter 1, p. 6
What Kind of Being is God? The Prophet Joseph Smith said: “If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds
this world in its orbit, and who upholds all the worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible—I say, if
you were to see him today you would see him like a man in form…” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345). God
is a glorified and perfected man, a personage of flesh and bones. Inside his tangible body is an eternal spirit (see D&C
130:22)
In chapter one the class is introduced to the idea that God is a glorified man. However, the quote from Joseph Smith that
is used, ellipses out the section of Joseph’s sermon that says God was once a man like us. This is not covered until the
final chapter, chapter 47.
Chapter 47, pp. 289-290, 293
What is Exaltation? Exaltation is eternal life, the kind of life that God lives. He lives in great glory. He is perfect. He
possesses all knowledge and all wisdom. He is the father of spirit children. He is a creator. We can become Gods like our
Heavenly Father. This is exaltation. (GP, 289-290, emphasis added)
This is the way our Heavenly Father became a God. Joseph Smith taught, “It is the first principle of the Gospel to know
for a certainty the character of God … he was once a man like us; ... God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth,
the same as Jesus Christ himself did” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 345-46, emphasis added).
When the Gospel Principles manual is used in the Gospel Essentials Sunday School class, this final chapter of the book is
covered about a year after the start of the class, meaning those in the class have been members of the LDS church for
nearly a year or more, and have likely developed strong social and emotional connections to the Church.5 Two key
teachings that were skirted or avoided at the beginning of the class are now presented clearly. First, men can become
Gods – capital G – like Heavenly Father, this is what it means to achieve exaltation. Second, we are simply repeating an
already established process, doing what God the Father has already done before us. This is the doctrine of eternal
progression. Men become Gods, who are then able to create other men who in turn can also progress to become Gods,
who repeat the process indefinitely. Up through the 1980s the Mormon Church taught these doctrines in clear,
unmistakable terms. The 1981 and 1988 editions of Gospel Principles, while undergoing some format changes (smaller
size, new cover design, adding an index) introduced no textual changes I’m aware of.
Criticism and falling convert ratios
However, by the late 1980s, among other things, the Mormon Church was receiving increasing scrutiny and criticism for
its non-Christian and non-biblical teaching that there were many Gods, God the Father was once a man like us, and men
could eventually become Gods, like God the Father. Whether there is a direct correlation or not, it is noteworthy that
the Mormon Church had it’s highest ratio of converts baptized to full-time missionaries in 1989 (8.0 converts per
missionary), only to fall steadily through 1992 to a 13-year low of 6.0 converts per missionary. It was in 1992 that the
Mormon Church introduced it’s first significant textual revisions to Gospel Principles (approved for publication 11/91).6
Significant Changes
Gospel Principles, 1992
Chapter 1, p. 9
No change from previous editions. The Joseph Smith quote is still in place.
Chapter 47, p. 302, 305
What is Exaltation? Exaltation is eternal life, the kind of life that God lives. He lives in great glory. He is perfect. He
possesses all knowledge and all wisdom. He is the Father of spirit children. He is a creator. We can become Gods like our
Heavenly Father. This is exaltation. (GP, 302)
This is the way our Heavenly Father became a God. Joseph Smith taught, “It is the first principle of the Gospel to know
for a certainty the character of God … he was once a man like us; ... God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth,
the same as Jesus Christ himself did” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 345-46).
Though small, both these changes remove key words and de-emphasize multiplicity of Gods and men becoming Gods.
Gospel Principles, 1997
Chapter 1, p. 9
What Kind of Being is God? The Prophet Joseph Smith said: “If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds
this world in its orbit, and who upholds all the worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible—I say, if
you were to see him today you would see him like a man in form…” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345).
God is a glorified and perfected man, a personage of flesh and bones. Inside his tangible body is an eternal spirit (see
D&C 130:22)
In this edition the paragraph above with the Joseph Smith quote is removed entirely. In its place is the following:
Because we are made in his image (see Moses 6:9), we know that God has a body that looks like ours. His eternal spirit is
housed in a tangible body of flesh and bones (see D&C 130:22). God’s body, however is perfected and glorified, with a
glory beyond all description. (GP, p. 9)
Since 1997, those using this manual are not even exposed to the resource Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith until
they reach the end of the book. And when it is discussed, the references to being “Gods” like Heavenly Father have been
removed since 1992.
Chapter 47, p. 302, 305 (No additional changes from 1992 edition)
Another LDS Church manual that has been edited, perhaps to avoid drawing attention to the teaching that God was once
a man like us, is Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: JOSEPH F. SMITH, published in 1998.
On page 337 of this LDS Church manual introducing members to the teachings of the Church’s 6th President on the idea
of becoming “like” God is the following:
…We must become like [God]; peradventure to sit upon thrones, to have dominion, power, and eternal increase. God
designed this in the beginning. … This is the object of our existence in the world.
What is omitted by the ellipsis? Here is quote as it appears in an earlier Mormon Church-published book, Gospel
Doctrine: Selections from the Sermons and Writings of Joseph F. Smith, Deseret Book Co., 1939, p. 63, with the significant
portion of the ellipsed material in bold.
In other words we must become like him; peradventure to sit upon thrones, to have dominion, power, and eternal
increase. God designed this in the beginning. We are the children of God. He is an eternal being, without beginning of
days or end of years. He always was, he is, he always will be. We are precisely in the same condition and under the
same circumstances that God our heavenly Father was when he was passing through this, or similar ordeal.
Thus, while the 1939 book containing the teachings of President Joseph F. Smith made it clear that God the Father once
shared a condition that is the same as ours today, current Mormon Church leaders omitted his clear teaching from the
modern manual.
2. Mormon Pageants and Temple Open Houses
The Mormon Church produces a number of pageants that celebrate its unique history and tell the story of Mormonism
with dramatic reenactments featuring casts of hundreds of performers. Yet, seldom, if ever, do these lavish
performances provide accurate information on Joseph Smith’s distinctive teachings on God being a man like us and men
becoming Gods. Here are a couple of examples.
Mormon Miracle Pageant – Manti, Utah
The Mormon Miracle Pageant, performed each June on the grounds of the Manti Temple in Manti, Utah, attracted
77,500 visitors during 8 days of performances in 2006. However, while the performance featured a lengthy segment on
the life, teaching and death of Joseph Smith, there was no mention of Joseph’s “God was once a man like us” teaching.7
Nauvoo Pageant: a Tribute to Joseph Smith – Nauvoo, Illinois
Similarly, Nauvoo Pageant: a Tribute to Joseph Smith, which in 2005 replaced the City of Joseph pageant in Nauvoo,
Illinois, omitted key material from one of its side performances – the King Follett Discourse. According to a ministry
colleague, Sharon Lindbloom (Mormon Coffee blog), who attended the pageant both last year and this year (2006), an
actor portraying Joseph Smith recited excerpts from this historic sermon delivered at the LDS Church’s 1844 April
General Conference. However, in contrast to the previous year, the 2006 version of the presentation was noticeably
sanitized. Gone were all the references to God was once a man like us and the need for men to need to learn to become
Gods themselves, the same as all other Gods before them had done.8
Mormon Temple Open Houses
I have attended over 12 Mormon Temple open houses on three different continents in the last 6 years and at each one
the unique Mormon teachings on God, men and role of Mormon temples in helping men become Gods were omitted.
Furthermore, on multiple occasions when I had opportunity after the tour to ask questions in a public context with other
people standing around and listening, the Mormon missionaries, Mormon leaders and Mormon tour guides I spoke to
nearly always denied the existence of many of these doctrines, accusing me of inventing lies to discredit the Mormon
Church. They persisted in these denials until I produced an official Mormon manual and began to document my point.
Then the denials often turned to strong affirmations and a defense of the teaching that had been denied moments
earlier.
A recent web article records similar incidents of deliberate deception by LDS Church representatives at the August 2006
open house of the Sacramento, California Mormon Temple.9
3. LDS Online materials
The Mormon Church provides extensive material on its website www.mormon.org on the subject of who is God and
what is he like, and yet in page after page of material there is no mention of God once being a man like us, there is no
mention of exaltation to godhood, there is no mention of God being a mortal man, who lived on his own earth and
progressed to becoming a God, nor that man is supposed to follow a plan of eternal progression and also eventually
become a God. A person could not come to know that Mormon prophets, apostles and leaders taught consistently and
repeatedly as a key doctrine, up until at least the 1960’s and 70’s, that God the Father was once a man like us. For the
investigator and general public, that information is not readily available.
Also online, from the July 2006 Ensign, is an intriguing statement by the current Prophet, Gordon B. Hinckley in his First
Presidency Message, “In These Three I Believe.”
I recall reading a tract some years ago written by a critic, an enemy of the Church whose desire was to undermine the
faith of the weak and the unknowing. The tract repeated fallacies that had been parroted for a century and more. It
purported to set forth what you and I, as members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, believe.
Without wishing to argue with any of our friends of other faiths, many of whom I know and for whom I have the highest
regard, I take this opportunity to set forth my position on this most important of all theological subjects.
I believe without equivocation or reservation in God the Eternal Father. He is my Father, the Father of my spirit, and the
Father of the spirits of all men. He is the great Creator, the Ruler of the universe. He directed the Creation of this earth
on which we live. In His image man was created. He is personal. He is real. He is individual. He has “a body of flesh and
bones as tangible as man’s” (D&C 130:22). (http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,2043-1-3470-1,00.html, or
Ensign, July 2006, p. 3).
It is unfortunate that President Hinckley did not identify for his audience the “fallacies that had been parroted for a
century and more” and thus set the record straight. Nevertheless, in this public discourse, specifically designed to
articulate his beliefs, and by extension the beliefs of the Mormon Church, President Hinckley omitted any mention of
God being man, progressing to Godhood, or having a goddess wife. President Hinckley has also avoided such disturbing
Mormon teachings in various media interviews, which we will examine next.
4. Public Statements of the Current Prophet – Gordon B Hinckley
Don Lattin, religion editor for the San Francisco Chronicle, interviewed President Hinckley on April 13, 1997. Please keep
in mind this comes less than a year after the Ensign article by BYU professor Robert Millet that stated, “Knowing what
we know concerning God our Father -- … that he was once a man and dwelt on an earth.”
Don Lattin (religion editor, interviewing Gordon B. Hinckley, San Francisco Chronicle, April 13, 1997, p 3/Z1)
Q: There are some significant differences in your beliefs [and other Christian churches]. For instance, don’t Mormons
believe that God was once a man?
Hinckley: I wouldn’t say that. There was a little couplet coined, “As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.”
Now that’s more of a couplet than anything else. That gets into some pretty deep theology that we don’t know very
much about. [emphasis added]
Q: So you’re saying the church is still struggling to understand this?
Hinckley: Well, as God is, men may become. We believe in eternal progression. Very strongly. We believe that the glory of
God is intelligence and whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the Resurrection.
... that's one thing that's different. Modern revelation. We believe all that God has revealed, all that he does now reveal,
we believe he has yet to reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.
In another interview, later that same year, we find President Hinckley claiming to be ignorant of whether the church
really teaches that God was once a man.
Gordon B. Hinckley, Time Magazine, quote, Aug 4, 1997:
On whether his church still holds that God the Father was once a man,
[Hinckley] sounded uncertain, ‘I don’t know that we teach it. I don’t know that we emphasize it... I understand the
philosophical background behind it, but I don’t know a lot about it, and I don’t think others know a lot about it.’
Luke Wilson, Executive Director of the Institute for Religious Research, wrote the LDS Church about this, querying the
office of the First Presidency as to whether Hinckley had been accurately quoted to say “I don’t know a lot about it.” The
reply he received from the LDS Church was clear, “The quotation you reference was taken out of context.”
He then wrote to TIME magazine asking them to reply to the Mormon Church’s allegation they had quoted President
Hinckley out of context. TIME made it clear they stood by their story, and asked the interviewing reporter to reply to
Wilson. Richard Ostling replied and provided a transcript of his conversation with President Hinckley which follows:
Q: Just another related question that comes up is the statements in the King Follett discourse by the Prophet.
Hinckley: Yeah
Q: ... about that, God the Father was once a man as we were. This is something that Christian writers are always
addressing. Is this the teaching of the church today, that God the Father was once a man like we are?
Hinckley: I don’t know that we teach it. I don’t know that we emphasize it. I haven’t heard it discussed for a long time in
public discourse. I don’t know. I don’t know all the circumstances under which that statement was made. I understand
the philosophical background behind it. But I don’t know a lot about it and I don’t know that others know a lot about it.
[emphasis added]
It appears clear President Hinckley wishes to avoid this aspect of Mormon doctrine and is willing to feign ignorance of his
own church’s teaching to do so.10 For a complete report on the relevant exchange of correspondence, please see the
article Dodging and Dissembling Prophet? (http://www.irr.org/mit/hinckley.html)
5. Training Missionaries to Proselytize under False Pretenses
From the previously mentioned interviews with Mormon Missionaries and conversations I’ve had with representatives of
the Mormon Church on this subject, it would seem safe to conclude that Mormon Missionaries are not being taught that
God was once a man like us. Subsequently, they cannot teach these things to investigators and they can legitimately
claim ignorance of such teachings when confronted with this material while on their mission. Mormon leaders practically
insure their missionaries are misrepresenting Mormon Church doctrines to potential converts.
Directly related to this is the omission of the section on Eternal Progression in the new Mormon missionary training
manual – Preach my Gospel. In the previous materials used by the Mormon Missionaries in their house-to-house work,
the fourth discussion was devoted to the topic of Eternal Progression. Eternal progression is not listed in the index of the
new manual, and to my knowledge, is never discussed. The term does appear on page 59 with a list of “Other Terms That
May Need Further Definition for Those you Teach.” Within the manual the terms exaltation and eternal life are both
explained as “living with God forever in eternal families” (Preach my Gospel, pp. 53, 70). This is amplified in a list of “Key
Definitions” which for exaltation has:
Exaltation: Eternal life in God’s presence; to become like our Father in Heaven and live in His presence. The greatest of all
the gifts of God. Exaltation comes through the Atonement of Christ and through obedience to all the laws and ordinances
of the gospel. (Preach my Gospel, p. 58)
There is no mention of God being a man like us, or men progressing to Godhood.
The result of Mormon leaders failing to disclose these disturbing doctrines, not teaching them to their own Missionaries,
and the Mormon President’s public denials, is that many members of the Mormon Church may not know about these
doctrines, or may likewise deny them. What should characterize our response to these issues?
How Can We Approach Mormons?
1. Approach them with awareness and affirmation
Be aware that fewer and fewer Mormons hold to or are even aware of the doctrine that God was once a man like us and
that men can become Gods. Exercise caution and do not assume or accuse the Mormon of believing these things; there is
a good chance they don’t. If a Mormon says, “I believe there is only one God, I believe that God has always been God,”
affirm that belief, reinforce that is what the Bible teaches and therefore it is also what we believe. Take the time when
appropriate to rehearse the biblical passages in Isaiah 44-46 and Deuteronomy 4:6 that teach this.
Now, we need to be careful that the Mormon is not using the same terminology and changing the definitions (this will be
addressed in the next section), but it is possible for a member of the Mormon Church, especially if they are a new convert,
to be unaware of, or to have rejected these particularly egregious and unbiblical aspects of Mormon teachings. When
this is the case we need to encourage them to continue this movement away from false Mormon teaching. It is also
possible the Mormon has retained biblical teachings about God he received earlier in his spiritual experience before being
proselytized into the LDS Church. When this is the case, we need to affirm biblically correct beliefs, and help them see
how such beliefs are irreconcilably different from official Mormon doctrine.
2. Challenge them with boldness and truth
If there is reason to believe the Mormon is not being honest in what he or she is affirming, if they are sharing terms but
changing definitions, we need to gently, but boldly challenge them with this, and continue to ask them questions until
what they truly believe comes out. We can be frank, without being contentious, abrasive, arrogant or mean. They key is
persistent questioning that demonstrates you want to know what the Mormon truly believes and has been taught by his
leaders. It will take boldness to do this, for if a Mormon affirms belief in the trinity, salvation by grace alone, Jesus as my
Savior, there is only one God etc., it is not wise to accept unquestioningly their affirmations.
I saw this firsthand several years ago when some Mormon Missionaries visited our office. One young man, at that point
within months of completing his two-year mission, asked me point blank, “Why don’t you accept us as Christians? We
believe in salvation by grace alone too.” Surprised he would make such an affirmation I replied, “Are you saying that both
of us can equally have eternal life in the presence of Heavenly Father through faith alone in Jesus Christ?” “Yes,” he
replied, “that’s what we believe.” Being yet skeptical of his affirmation, I decided to phrase the question differently. “So,
if you are a member of the Mormon Church, a faithful, temple-worthy Mormon who is married for time and eternity in
the temple, and I, on the other hand, never become a Mormon but continue to put my faith and trust in Jesus Christ and
live in obedience to him, trusting in God’s grace alone to save me, when we die, will we both end up in the same place?”
As he replied, he looked both offended and surprised, “No, of course not. You can’t make it to the celestial kingdom if you
never join the church.” “Ah then,” I said, “you don’t really believe in eternal life through faith alone, you need to do your
part to ultimately be considered worthy of Heavenly Father’s presence. That’s what makes us different, and part of the
reason why I cannot accept the Mormon Church as a Christian Church.”
I’ve had similar conversations since then, underscoring the need to be cautious and bold when a Mormon claims to
believe “just like we do.” But boldness in and of itself is not enough.
3. Respond with compassion and care
As we are dealing with Mormons and are able to present material like this that is now being avoided or covered up, we
should also clearly articulate how it continues to be an important, integral part of Mormon theology.11 The Mormon
Church affirms that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones. Well, how did he get that body of flesh and bones? The
reason God the Father has a body of flesh and bones is because he was once a man just like us and worked his way to
godhood. At one point he was not God, he was a mortal man, a man who lived, and died, according to some Mormon
sources.12
And yet, as we talk about these beliefs we need to be compassionate and caring. The Mormon person needs to know that
we value them as a person first, and consider their membership in the Mormon Church secondary. Apologetics is a tool
we use to reach certain people who need to hear the gospel – we use it to open minds and hearts so the truth can get in
and transform their lives. So what we learn about Mormonism, what we understand about the doctrinal system, what we
discover about the changes, the errors, the cover-up, the lack of integrity – all that should simply be a tool that lets us
more effectively and more compassionately reach out to these people. We should never use our knowledge as a sword
with which to cut them to ribbons – that should never be our goal. In our ministry to Mormons, compassion and care
needs to be predominant, and if at any point what we are feeling is “I just want to nail this person to the wall, I want to
show them up, I’m so sick of the deception,” then it is probably a good time to stop the conversation because the
Mormon will sense that attitude in you. However, if what is coming from you is a compassion and concern, a genuine
care for who they are and a desire for their salvation in Jesus solely through the unmerited grace of God, they will also
sense that and it will have as much impact as the information you are sharing.
Conclusion
Whether deliberately or unwittingly, Mormons on a regular basis fail to disclose Church teachings that are disturbing and
most clearly place them outside the Christian tradition. Beneath the affable, families-are-forever, wholesome image, lies
a disturbing pattern of cover-up, distortion and misrepresentation. This is all the more troubling because those in various
leadership positions apparently feel justified in engaging in this deception. From the 50,000+ missionaries going door to
door around the world, to Mormon President Gordon B. Hinckley’s interaction with the media, doctrines that have
distinguished and uniquely defined the Mormon religion are omitted, ignored or denied. When I asked one pair of
Mormon missionaries if when they went door to door they clearly presented their unique teachings about God being a
man who progressed to godhood and was married with a wife in heaven, they replied, “Of course we do not tell people
that. If we told people about that stuff they would never let us in to talk to them.” When I followed up with, “Don’t you
think that is a bit deceptive?”, they amiably replied, “No we have to give them milk before meat.”
One thing is certain, Mormon leaders have not repudiated Joseph Smith’s non-biblical teachings on the nature of God
and continue to promote them, albeit selectively. This means the Mormon Church continues to hold to doctrines that
make it decidedly non-Christian, while hiding these teachings from investigators, new members and even its own
missionaries. This calls for boldness as we expose the disingenuousness of Mormon leaders, and discernment and gentle
forthrightness as we draw Mormon people into truth, authenticity and spiritual worthiness through a restored
relationship with the one true, immutable, ‘from everlasting to everlasting’ God.
Notes
1
Missionary names changed to protect their identities.
2
In his 2005 book, A Different Jesus (Wm B. Eerdmans, p. 145), Millet stated “God is an exalted man”. This continues to
make it difficult to sustain the notion that either Millet personally, or the Mormon Church corporately, are moving away
from Mormonism’s non-biblical and unchristian definition of God.
3
Just as interesting is the date that Lorenzo Snow claimed to have received this revelation – in the spring of 1840. This is
four years before Joseph gave the King Follet discourse (April 1844) which was not published until August of that same
year. Snow said he shared his revelatory experience with Joseph Smith in 1843 in a confidential interview and received as
a reply from Joseph Smith, “Brother Snow, that is true gospel doctrine, and it is a revelation from God to you.” (Presidents
of the Church, 2003, p. 88). So, did Joseph influence Snow or did Snow influence Joseph? According to Snow, the idea was
first planted in his head before he was a Mormon convert in 1836, when Joseph’s father, Joseph Smith, Sr. told him “you
will become as great as you can possibly wish – even as great as God, and you cannot wish to be greater” (Improvement
Era, June 1919, p. 654. Cited in Pres. of the Church, p. 88).
4
This article has no author and appears to be recycled from the May 1995 Ensign article by Mormon Apostle Elder Dallin
Oaks, entitled “Apostasy and Restoration.”
5
The class structure and schedule was explained to me by a Mormon friend who is currently a bishop and has taught the
class himself.
6
In addition to the changes noted in the body of this article, another significant change to chapter 47 was the deletion of
the following summary statement regarding the requirements for exaltation: “In other words, each person must endure
in faithfulness, keeping all the Lord’s commandments until the end of his life on earth.” [emphasis added]. This change is
consistent with increased promotion of the “folk” doctrine that assures Mormons they don’t need perfection in this life
but will have millions of years if necessary to complete the perfection process after they die. While this is a popular and
widely held belief among Mormon people, there is no support for this concept in any Mormon Scripture, in fact the exact
opposite is taught.
7
For attendance figures and other official info see: http://www.mormonmiracle.org/information.html. I attended the
performance on June 15, 2006 and noted the lack of reference to the unique Mormon doctrines of God as once a man like
us, men becoming Gods, God having a wife. The pageant also mocked the various Christian denominations of Joseph’s
day, and omitted, among other things, Joseph using a gun to defend himself during the Carthage jail scene.
8
For Sharon’s report and commentary see http://mormoncoffee.blogspot.com/2006/08/new-and-improved-kingfollett.htmll.
9
See for example, http://sacredorsecret.com/temples_tours_truth.htm, and Saturday, August 19, 2006 “The good, the
bad, and the ugly” blog here: http://www.evidenceministries.blogspot.com/.
10
President Hinckley’s artful dodges became readily apparent a short time later when he addressed an all-Mormon
audience at their semi-annual General Conference. In what the Ostlings see as a pointed reference to those interviews,
Hinckley assured his listeners, “None of you need worry because you read something that was incompletely reported. You
need not worry that I do not understand some matters of doctrine.” He added, “I think I understand them thoroughly.”
The Ostlings note that the audience laughed understandingly. (Richard N. and Joan K. Ostling, Mormon America: The
Power and the Promise, Harper San Francisco, 1999, p. 296)
11
Some within the Christian community suggest these changes indicate the Mormon Church is rethinking its doctrines
and moving toward more biblical teaching on the nature of God. I find it difficult to sustain this position in the face of
recent Ensign articles and LDS Church manuals that I’ve cited that continue to promote the God was once a man doctrine
to the general membership.
12
See Achieving a Celestial Marriage, p. 132, which states, “As shown in this chapter, our Father in heaven was once a
man as we are now, capable of physical death.”