Mormonism Impossible (Part Three): The Greatest Conceivable Being

Latter-Day Saints' monolatrism proves monotheism to be true.

I recently emailed a member of the LDS because I wanted to see how he might answer my question regarding some material in Mormonism Impossible Part Two. Specifically, I wanted to see what some of them thought about the Law of the Gods.[1] As in, what exactly causes it. Where did this Law that says men can become gods come from? Read my question below:

I have questions that lead to other questions about LDS doctrine. I am genuinely curious about how this all makes sense. For starters, I understand that if a member of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints lives a holy life, that when they die and go on to the celestial kingdom, they become gods. I know that some members shy away from this teaching, but it is what I find in D&C. So, whether or not LDS become a god of their own planet, I am not completely certain, other than what I see in D&C, which seems to teach that this is the case. Since it is the case, and a man must be married in order to achieve this goal according to D&C, then I imagine that heavenly Father, who was once a man, must have inhabited a planet that was at least populated enough to find a wife for himself, was a holy man. So my question is, what is it that makes this law possible? Why is it the case that men become gods? If we go back in time for infinity, and all these men through the billions of years become gods, why is it the case? Who or what made this pattern work this way?

I really want to know the answer to this. Please tell me where I am wrong, and help me understand my ultimate question. Thank you!

As I touched on this in Part two, I will argue in this article that this Law in Mormonism not only transcends Mormon doctrine, but it also proves the existence of the Greatest Conceivable Being. But, before we get to that, see the letter I received from my LDS friend below:

Thanks for your email. You are not wrong in your statement as extrapolated from the Doctrine & Covenants. It's found in section 132 (verse 20 specifically, among others). One of the beliefs of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that through the Atonement of Jesus Christ all humankind has the potential to become perfected and that we can ultimately become like our Father in Heaven. How this is possible is frankly beyond my understanding. It would be certainly interesting to know how or why this has worked this way for eons, but the scriptures do not give us this detail. Also, I'm not sure if you were referring to men in the "mankind" sense, or men as in "male." But to be clear, we don't believe that this opportunity is only available to males. Both men and women, married and sealed together, can be perfected together and become exalted like God. I can't imagine this [god-status] is an immediate that thing that happens. I tend to think of it as a gradual progression over eons and eons. We must prove faithful in this short moment of mortality, and if so, we are granted the opportunity to dwell with God and Christ in the Celestial realms for eternity where we can learn to become like Him. And as we are glorified, it only adds to his glory.

This is all really deep doctrine. It's fascinating, but sometimes I feel we can look beyond the mark. What's most important is to focus on how am I doing as a person today? Am I a good husband, father, son, friend, etc.? Am I a disciple of Jesus Christ? Am I keeping the commandments and helping others? etc. etc. I personally feel this mortal life is an opportunity for each of us to align our will with God's will. None of us will be perfect, but we can strive to be better each day.

Hope that helps some.[2]^,[3]

Not only does this answer I received above admit that it is unknown why this Law of the Gods has been this way for "eons," but it also admits that the Mormon scriptures do not explain it. It is something that Mormons are to take a blind trust in. I think the answer here though, comes to us philosophically, which is fairly easy to understand.

The Law of the Gods Transcends Mormonism

To transcend something means to be or go beyond the range or limits of it. When we talk about God for instance, God transcends the physical limits of the universe, because He created it.[4] He must be outside of the physical universe in order to create it. If God were in the physical universe, then He would have created Himself, which is absurd.

Similarly, the Law of the Gods in Mormonism transcends the gods themselves in Mormonism. We can see this in the letter I received above. The Law of the Gods says that if a person is good enough in their life on earth, that they will become a God (exaltation). But where does this Law come from? It seems that no one can answer this question. This Law transcends the collection of gods in Mormonism who were once human beings. They become gods because of this law. The problem is, this law is nowhere to be found. One might wonder then, that if this law is above those who enter into godhood in Mormonism, is that Law, God? This brings us to our next argument.

The Law of the Gods proves the existence of the Greatest Conceivable Being

Think of it like this: If the Law of the Gods exists, then there must be a being that transcends this Law. It is a requirement. In other words, for this Law to exist, something must have created the Law in order for this pattern to exist that men become gods (in Mormon theology). We know that all Laws require a Lawgiver. The law to stop at a stop sign was put into effect just like the law of gravity. God finely-tuned this anthropic constant so perfectly that if gravity were more, then life could not exist, and similarly if it were less, then the same result would take place, that life could not exist.

Even if this Law of the Gods were true, then it would ultimately prove that only one God exists, simply because there must be an explanation for this Law to be in existence from eternity past in the first place. Remember, every law requires a lawgiver. So who wrote the Law of the Gods? Who is the cause of this pattern? The answer is that if it were true, then the one true God wrote it. The problem is, this is also absurd. If it were true, it would reduce the doctrine of exaltation in Mormonism to a person becoming something less than what God is, never being able to attain the place where God is, therefore the One God would then be Greater than every other “God.” It would make the Mormonism and the D&C ultimately false, because these teach that men can become “Gods.”[5]

What this means is that if it is true, then Mormonism is false, but if it is not true, then Mormonism is still false (at least as far as the doctrine of exaltation is concerned). So the ultimate cause of the pattern that men become “Gods” in Mormonism, if true, proves that there is only one true God, which creates a bunch of logical, philosophical, and theological problems in Mormon doctrine as we can see, but also the ultimate cause of this pattern that men become “Gods” transcends those who become “Gods” themselves, which really makes one wonder how much of a “God” a person can really become if there is something that transcends them. On top of all of this, it shows what a low view of God Mormons seem to really have about their deity.

For more, see my book on Mormonism:

https://www.amazon.com/Mormonism-Refuting-Fundamental-Apologetics-Latter-Day/dp/1662885377/

Written by Nace Howell through the grace of the Lord Jesus

[1] Another way to put this would be “the cause of the pattern.”

[2] This is the letter in its entirety, minus greetings.

[3] Emphasis mine.

[4] See John 1:1-3.

[5] See D&C 132:19-29 (focus on v. 20).

Comments

The Evidence and Power of Testimony: The Apostolic Witness

What to say to People who Demand more Evidence for God. Why is there something rather than nothing? Glacier National Park. © Nace Howell, 2018. The question is, how much evidence do you require? Would Jesus have to come back and slap you in the face with evidence that He is God? It seems to me that there is a line we must draw. We do this in all other areas of our lives, so why would we treat theism any different? When a court convicts, they do so “beyond a reasonable doubt.” I would like to take a few moments to explore this a bit. But before we get to that, I want to pose a question, which is… why are you the standard? What makes you think He has to prove His existence to everyone individually? He already created the universe from nothing. In the beginning, there was a big bang. Seriously… do you believe your mom when she tells you a story about her day? Did you believe the reports of 9/11 when they were happening? Do you accept the testimony of anything you hear on social ...

Baptism is Not Necessary for Salvation According to the Early Church

Let’s dive right in. The Bible says in Acts 2:37-41, Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls. The phrase in Acts 2:38 that reads, “for the forgiveness of your sins” modifies the word repentance, not the word baptism. See more about this Here . What is interesting is that those who translate the above verse as meaning that baptism is a requ...

Using Guilt to Guide to the Truth

While taking a cultural apologetics class in my doctorate, I rambled along in a 30-page paper and in it, I wrote that, “I define religion as an anthropological system consisting of worship which is often filled with specific sacred rituals that seeks to appease or eradicate guilt.” My professor red-penned this and said that I am not yet in an authoritative position to make such definitions. But I was never asked how I came up with such a definition. The thing is, working on my second post-graduate degree in apologetics, studying many other religions on a deeper level was inevitable, and by this, I noticed a pattern in all of them which was the fact that they all seek to appease or eradicate guilt, including Buddhism , even though many adherents of Buddhism claim that it is not a religion . The point is that all religions seek to eradicate guilt on some level, because guilt crosses all cultures and times, to all people . Guilt transcends all people. The ...

The God of the Killdozer Operator, Marvin Heemeyer

While working toward becoming an apologist and a pastor, I was a heavy equipment operator. I have over 15 years’ experience in the field, focusing on hydrological restorations (stream bank and river restoration and water dam removals) and site development for building pads (ranging from houses to one million + sq. ft. warehouses). I say this because I want to show where the heart for writing article this came about. Marvin Heemeyer purchased a bulldozer from an auction which was a Komatsu D355A with an operating weight of 97,907 lbs. (this does not include the weight of Heemeyer’s fabricated addition). In the picture above, I am operating a Komatsu D155AX which has an operating weight of 89,300 lbs. (If I remember correctly, we were developing the site for a 550,000 sq. ft. warehouse building pad). Heemeyer then went on a rampage in his armored bulldozer in Granby, CO. I don’t want to go into great details about what led up to Heemeyer doing what he did, nor do I want to go into great ...

Self-tests of Some of the World's Religions

It is fairly common for a religion of the world to give itself a sort of test for truth, since this is one question that is asked of any religion: “Why should I believe what you are telling me is true?” After all, the answer to such a question will ultimately result in followers of specific beliefs and doctrines, let alone religions, or will result in a lack of followers. If a religion can answer this question posed by seekers and thinkers, and therefore train its adherents to be able to answer why a religion is true, this will inevitably help people believe in such, even if the claims are false. If there is no answer, this is where a religion will perhaps find more trouble for itself. Many religions make an appeal to a higher authority, namely, God , for the veracity of their existence and as a result, no one can question the truth from such an authority. This is correct in a sense, that if in fact God is making such a claim, then what is said or stated is true ...

Two Problems Jesus has with the Mormon Doctrine of Eternal Families

Mormonism teaches that those who are married in a temple can be married for eternity. In Doctrine and Covenants 132:15–20, we find the following: 15 Therefore, if a man 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 marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, 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 angels of God for...

An Overlooked Argument Against the Book of Mormon

The Book of Mormon is written in a style of language that was not used by anyone at the time that it was written and published. This style of English is called Early Modern English . This fact is an anachronism that I find to be severely overlooked by those who seek the truth about the Book of Mormon. Many Mormons will instantly write this objection off concerning the veracity of the Book of Mormon, even to the point of saying that such an objection is lazy and pitiful, while not giving any rebuttals worth their weight. I recently insinuated the absurdity of the Book of Mormon by asking the question, “Why was the Book of Mormon translated into Early Modern English?” I’m saying that it is absurd that the BoM uses an out-of-date language. A Mormon replied to me that the Bible has equal absurdities. He said, “Why is [The BoM translation into Early Modern English] absurd? Is it absurd that God uses a donkey to speak to Balaam in Numbers 22?” First, this is a tu quo...

Defending Christianity against Jehovah’s Witnesses

Defending Christianity against Jehovah’s Witnesses Using much of their “bible” to refute them “But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect ” (NIV 1 Peter 3:15). In other words, LOVE THEM . Jehovah’s Witnesses Biblical Truths Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe in the Trinity. J.Ws. believe that Jesus was a “little god” (lower case g). J.Ws. believe in a different “ Jesus ” because of the NWT accounts. J.Ws. call themselves “Christians.” J.Ws. believe Jesus is not to be worshiped. J.Ws. believe that Jesus was once, and is again, Michael the archangel. Genesis 1:26 says, “Let Us crea...

Who Made God? Identifying Categorical Errors

A category is simply a distinct class to which something belongs… A set of objects that can be treated as equal in some way. A Macintosh apple belongs to the category, apple, and not what we categorize as an orange. Similarly, colors are in a different category than taste. When we say, “apples and oranges” what we mean is that there has been a confusion of categories. Sure, they are both fruit, but when you examine both, there is an obvious difference. An apple is not an orange, and an orange is not an apple. Macintosh, Granny Smith, and red delicious are all apples. Navel, blood, and Valencia are all oranges. To mix the two, for instance, to call a navel orange an apple, would be a categorical error, sometimes referred to as a category mistake. How Identifying Categorical Errors can Help with Apologetics It seems that simply learning about or being reminded of categorical errors can help us be more aware of them. We have all heard or thought of ourselves, the...

How to Show a Mormon the Difference Between the Mormon Jesus and the Biblical Jesus

I find that Mormons frequently claim that they are Christians, and that they want to be referred to as Christians, and that they have even recently sought to distance themselves from the word “Mormon.” The problem is, they worship another Jesus, and here is how to show them the difference between the Mormon Jesus and the Biblical Jesus. Before we get to that, some clarifications are necessary. Specifically, that they cannot even distance themselves from being called "Mormons." The Mormon President Russell Nelson said, “What’s in a name or, in this case, a nickname? When it comes to nicknames of the Church, such as the “LDS Church,” the “Mormon Church,” or the “Church of the Latter-day Saints,” the most important thing in those names is the absence of the Savior’s name. To remove the Lord’s name from the Lord’s Church is a major victory for Satan. When we discard the Savior’s name, we are subtly disregarding all that Jesus Christ did for us—even His Atonement.” [1] ...

Apologetics and Evidence

Search This Blog