Skip to main content

Joseph Smith had the same Demon that influenced Muhammad


What does Islam have in common with Mormonism? Seriously, the similarities are uncanny. Like human beings, demons are creatures of habit. The Bible does not tell us much about them, but from what it does tell us, we can learn a lot. Jesus reveals to us some things about their behavior:

When the unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it passes through waterless places seeking
rest, but finds none. Then it says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when it comes, it finds the house empty, swept, and put in order. Then it goes and brings with it seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter and dwell there, and the last state of that person is worse than the first…[1]

 

Jesus clearly knows that demons have typical behaviors. He has seen it many times before. He lets us know that a typical behavior for a demon is that home is where the heart is. When your house crumbles to the ground, you move to a new one. Likewise, when a person dies, the demon is forced to move to a new house. Much like what we are discussing here: from Muhammad to Joseph Smith and likely several in between.

I find it interesting what Paul teaches Timothy about where the doctrines or teachings of demons come from: “Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared…”[2] This passage seems to give strength to my argument that Christians cannot be possessed, but they can definitely be influenced.

Consider another typical experience found in the New Testament Gospels concerning demons… Someone brings a person who is possessed by a demon to Jesus, and at times, there is a wild reaction at the sight of Jesus by the demon, signifying yet another typical behavior, but in the case that person is blind because of the demon, there seems to be no such reaction: “Then a demon-oppressed man who was blind and mute was brought to him, and he healed him, so that the man spoke and saw.”[3] So with this man who was “oppressed” by a demon (the Greek word used here is δαιμονιζόμενος, which means to be possessed by a demon), it seems to point to the idea that there was a demon working to keep this man blind and mute in an ongoing fashion. In other words, a demon lived in this man and made his house (out of him) the way he liked it, and maintained the furniture in his house, so to speak, much like any human being would do. Another point to this is to show that demons are very comfortable around human beings, likely because human beings are creatures of habit, and so the demon can learn the habits and accommodate. In other words, human beings are predictable. In any case, we find that from these passages, we can come to the conclusion that a demon prefers what is familiar and predictable, and will manipulate the person he possesses or influences in a specific direction.

One way to see that the same demon that possessed or influenced Muhammad ultimately landed in Joseph Smith is by examining the same tracks that were left in the snow. When an animal has a distinct physical characteristic such as a broken leg that was healed, or a toe that was trapped somehow and pulled off, or even a leg that was stuck in between two trees and the animal broke it off, a tracker can recognize the distinctions in the tracks and clearly see that he is following the same animal, even from several days or weeks before, for whatever reason (hunting, biological studies, photography, etc.). So let’s now look at the tracks in the snow, so to speak, and we will see that it is the case that the founder of Mormonism was indeed possessed (or influenced) by the same demon as the founder of Islam.

 

They both had multiple wives

Sura 4:3 in the Quran, we find, “And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the right course.”[4]

Here, not only does this passage in the Quran condone polygamy, but even gives a specific number that a man can marry.

 

The Latter Day Saints website states, “After receiving a revelation commanding him to practice plural marriage, Joseph Smith married multiple wives and introduced the practice to close associates.”[5] Again, we find that, conveniently, Joseph Smith received a revelation and therefore condoned polygamy.

 

It is common knowledge that both the founder of Islam and the founder of Mormonism were deeply rooted in polygamy. Many have argued at this point that the Bible is as well, but the difference is that the Bible never condones polygamy, whereas Islam does, and Mormonism did (and many Mormons today still condone it). Polygamy and polyandry both belittle the opposite sex. Polygamy shows how women are lower than men in importance, and similarly for polyandry, men are belittled by elevating the woman above men in a matter of importance. The Bible teaches that men and women are valued equally by God. In Galatians 3:28, we read, “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” In Christianity, the souls of women and men are held in the same respect. This cannot be said in Mormonism and Islam.

 

 

They both claimed to be a prophet

 

The Quran tells its readers that “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah…” It is pretty clear that Muhammad thought pretty highly of himself. See the larger context:

 

He it is who sent His Messenger with the guidance and the true religion that He may make it prevail over all the religions; and Allah is enough for a witness. Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those with him are firm of heart against the unbelievers, compassionate among themselves; you will see them bowing down, prostrating themselves, seeking grace from Allah and pleasure; their marks are in their faces because of the effect of prostration; that is their description in the Taurat (Torah) and their description in the Injeel (New Testament); like as seed-produce that puts forth its sprout, then strengthens it, so it becomes stout and stands firmly on its stem, delighting the sowers that He may enrage the unbelievers on account of them; Allah has promised those among them who believe and do good, forgiveness and a great reward.[6]

 

Similarly, Joseph Smith writes, “And again, so soon as I had the spirit of prophecy, when standing up, I prophesied concerning the rise of this Church, and many other things connected with the Church, and this generation of the children of men.”[7]

Again, both Joseph Smith and Muhammad claimed to be prophets of God, and though there are uncanny similarities between the two, there are basically no similarities between them and biblical prophets.

 

They both were visited by an angel

 

One of my former professors writes in his book, "The Guide to Answering Islam: What every Christian needs to know about Islam and the rise of radical Islam," the story of what Muslims believe to be the history of how Muhammad received his revelation.

 

When Muhammad said that he could not read, the angel embraced him and forced the air out of his lungs, and then commanded him again to read. Again, Muhammad said he did not know how to read. This sequence occurred three times before the angel finally told him what the words were on the cloth.

‘Proclaim! (or read!) in the name of thy Lord and

Cherisher, Who created-

Created man, out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood:

Proclaim! And thy Lord is Most Bountiful,

Who taught (the use of) the pen,

Taught man that which he knew not’

This passage was the first revelation of what has become known as the Quran, which is a term related to the command to read or to recite.[8]

 

So Muhammad was clearly visited by an angel, but what about Joseph Smith? See if you can spot the same broken-legged tracks in the snow. In The History of Joseph Smith, which is an autobiography, we find the following:

 

While I was thus in the act of calling upon God, I discovered a light appearing in my room, which continued to increase until the room was lighter than at noonday, when immediately a personage appeared at my bedside, standing in the air, for his feet did not touch the floor…

He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Moroni; that God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people.

 

Does it show yet that Muhammad and Joseph Smith both fall under something bigger? That there is a creature of habit influencing both of them? If you are unconvinced, please keep reading.

 


They both taught that Jesus was different than what the Bible teaches

 

Even though they both were alive much later than when the Bible was written, they both taught that Jesus was different than what the Bible describes. Look at what the Quran says about Jesus, which was written 600 years after the time of Jesus:

 

And their saying: Surely we have killed the Messiah, Isa son of Marium, the messenger of Allah; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like Isa) and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for sure. [158] Nay! Allah took him up to Himself; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.[9]

 

The question is, should we believe a source that was written much later than the event or would it make more sense to believe a source closer in time to the event? Think about the events of 9/11 for instance. Would journalism be likely more accurate a year after the even or 1000 years after the event, when all the witnesses are dead, and there is so much time for legends to begin cropping up? It seems like a no-brainer.

When we see what Joseph Smith taught about Jesus in the book of Mormon, it is clear that it is a direct and twisted plagiarism of the Bible. In 2 Nephi 25:23, Joseph Smith says, “For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace we are saved, after all we can do.[10]

It might sound ok at first reading, but when the book of Mormon says, “to believe in Christ,” the question is which Christ? On top of this, how can we pull ourselves up by our own boot straps? How can we help in our own salvation?

In Ephesians 2:8-9, we find this: “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.”[11] These two passages have very similar verbiage, yet they describe two very different Saviors. One is like a janitor,[12] sweeping up the mess of moral failures that people leave behind, which ultimately teaches that those who fail morally against God (sin) help reach the goal of their own salvation, and the other (from the Bible) is that salvation is a free gift, and there is nothing we (sinners) can do to earn any part of it.

So the Mormon Jesus or the Quranic Jesus is not the same Jesus that the Bible describes. The Law of Non-contradiction shows us that not all three of these can be true at the same time and in the same sense. All or two of these (between the Bible, the Quran, and the Book of Mormon) must be false. My argument is that the Biblical account is true and the book of Mormon and the Quran are false.

 

Both taught that the Bible is corrupted

 

In order for a new religion such as this to work and for converts to be won over to the new religion, there must be an attack on the Bible itself. The Quran teaches that the Bible is corrupted in several passages. Here below is but one:

 

…they altered the words from their places and they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of; and you shall always discover treachery in them excepting a few of them; so pardon them and turn away; surely Allah loves those who do good (to others). [14] And with those who say, we are Christians, we made a covenant, but they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of, therefore we excited among them enmity and hatred to the day of resurrection; and Allah will inform them of what they did.[13]

 

As alluded to, it is a basic requirement for a new theistic religion to attack the Bibles’ integrity because everyone knows that the Law of non-contradiction would shut them down. This is why the Bible’s authority must be questioned in order for new doctrines to be taught.

 Similarly, in the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith writes, “For behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.” [14] Again, in the “Articles of Faith” Smith writes, “We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.”[15] In the Bible, there is a curse spelled out for those to add or take away from the Bible: “I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.”[16] Since the Book of Mormon came after the Bible, and adds to the words of the prophecy of the Revelation, then the author is cursed. Deuteronomy 4:2 is often used by Mormons to combat this argument: “You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you.”[17] The problem for Mormonism is that we find that the subject there is on commandments, not on prophecy.

Everyone knows that if you attack the foundation, the whole building falls. But the problem is, the Bible is definitely not corrupted and we have strong evidence that it is not. Critics will often say that the Bible was corrupted and will use the analogy of the children’s game of telephone, which involves a group of kids and it starts with one sentence and is whispered from one child to the next, and by the end, the one sentence was nothing like what the first one heard. The problem with this is that when the gospel writers (for instance) finished their writing, they would give it away to the person to whom they were writing. Then it would get copied by a scribe, and they would get it back and it would be given away again and again. Then the copies of the copies would be copied and it would spread like wildfire. Today, there are over 5,800 ancient New Testament manuscripts in the original language (Koine) from as early as the 2nd century, and if we count the manuscripts collected that were translated into another language, such as Syriac or Latin, there are over 25,000 ancient manuscripts and fragments. In order for biblical corruption to happen, all of these hand written manuscripts would have to be brought back and burned in a pile and rewritten. Needless to say, this would be impossible. We can literally compare and contrast these manuscripts from 2000 years ago forward, and see that any variants or spelling errors by the scribes who copied them, does not amount to any doctrinal or covenantal changes whatsoever.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” This is true even today, and will be for eternity.

They both present challenges to the reader of their supposed sacred books

 

The gauntlet is thrown at your feet by both of these religions, and more specifically, from both founders. The Quran says, “And if you are in doubt as to that which we have revealed to our servant, then produce a chapter like it and call on your witnesses besides Allah if you are truthful.”[18] Basically what is going on here is that the reader is challenged to create something “as beautiful” as the Quran, because the author of the Quran believes it to be impossible. In any case, this does not attest to the truth of the Quran. For instance, I could not write anything like the Lord of the Rings, yet it is true that someone (clearly) could.

Speaking of such, there is a similar argument for Mormonism, which no one could possibly write something with all of those cities and details of what went on that are in the Book of Mormon, but again, I appeal to Lord of the Rings. Tolkien not only gave every character a name and a story, but also developed worlds and even a language (!).

Similarly to the Quran, Joseph Smith presents a challenge to his readers: “And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things [in the Book of Mormon] are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.[19]

What about those who read the Quran under this principle? Is something true just because I believe it in my heart? Jeremiah 17:9 says that “The heart is deceitful above all things, and beyond cure. Who can understand it?” In other words, don’t think with your heart! One’s feelings should not determine the truth on such matters. 

 

There is a major focus from both on endless, blissful sex at death

It is interesting that this both of these religions are very man-centered. Not woman-and-man-centered, or just woman, but only man-centered. How can we tell? Because at death, there are endless reward of sex. Muslim men will supposedly get 72 perpetual virgins, and Mormon men will gain endless celestial sex in order to populate their own planet. Note what the Quran states: “Thus (shall it be), and we will wed them with Houris [a beautiful, young virgin companion of a faithful Muslim in heaven] pure, beautiful ones.”[20] Also, “Surely for those who guard (against evil) is achievement, Gardens and vineyards, And voluptuous women of equal age; And a pure cup.”[21] These are not the only places one can find a discussion concerning the rewards in heaven for a Muslim, but the point is made.

In Mormonism, we find the following:

 

The Savior was begotten by the Father of His spirit, by the same Being who is the Father of our spirits, and that is all the organic difference between Jesus Christ and you and me. And a difference there is between our Father and us consists in that He has gained His exaltation, and has obtained eternal lives. The principle of eternal lives is an eternal existence, eternal duration, eternal exaltation. Endless are His kingdoms, endless His thrones and His dominions, and endless are His posterity; they never will cease to multiply from this time henceforth and forever.[22]

 

What is scary here is not only the doctrines about the endless celestial sex, but also the amount of differences in theology between Christians and Mormons. It is curious why Mormons want to be labeled just another Christian denomination. The above quote from Joseph Smith should clue us in as to why Mormons will never be considered Christians by Christians. They do not follow the real Jesus. Not only that, but the Mormon Jesus had a beginning, where the Biblical Jesus did not (see John 1:1); the Mormon God was once a regular man as the above citation alludes (as many other passages in Mormon material); the biblical God the Father never had a beginning (see Isaiah 44:8).

The Mormon logic looks like this: from the above citation, we find that the Mormon Jesus was begotten by the Mormon Father. This Mormon Father is also the father of our spirits (implying the existence of the “heavenly mother”). This Mormon Father has gained his exaltation, and because of such, he is the producer of spirit children (through celestial sex). Elsewhere, according to Joseph Smith, we can also have the same exaltation that the Mormon Father has.[23] Marriage is a requirement for this exaltation. This implies that the Mormon God had a beginning, and also that there are multiple “Gods.”

Up to this point, we have several similarities between Mormonism and Islam. Does it make them the same religion? Definitely not. Does it make them connected? I believe so. This list is far from exhaustive. There are many other similarities not mentioned. These comparisons are definitely enough to see the same tracks in the snow, and the “personality” of the demon behind all of this deception.

 


What other similarities have you noticed between Islam and Mormonism?


 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

© Nace Howell, 2022








[1] ESV. Matthew 12:43-45.

[2] ESV. 1 Timothy 4:1-2; emphasis mine.

[3] ESV Matthew 12:22.

[4] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.). Sura 4:3.

[5] https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/joseph-smith-and-plural-marriage.?lang=eng

[6] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.); emphasis mine. Sura 48:28-29.

[7] Joseph Smith—History. 1:73.

[8] https://www.amazon.com/GUIDE-ANSWERING-ISLAM-Christian-Radical/dp/1949586766/

[9] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.). Sura 4:171.

[10] Book of Mormon 2 Nephi 25:23.

[11] ESV Ephesians 2:8-9.

[12] This analogy is from Lynn Wilder’s book, Unveiling Grace.

[13] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.). Sura 5:13-14.

[14] Book of Mormon. 1 Nephi 13:26.

[15] History of the church, Vol. 4, pp. 535-541.

[16] ESV. Revelation 22:18-19.

[17] ESV Deuteronomy 4:2.

[18] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.). Sura 2:23.

[19] Book of Mormon. Moroni 10:4-5.

[20] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.). Sura 44:54.

[21] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.). Sura 78:31-34

[22] https://jod.mrm.org/4/215. Journal of Discourses volume 4, page 218.

[23] See Doctrine and Covenants 132:19-38.

Comments

  1. I am not Mormon or Muslim or Atheist or Humanist, I am a God fearing and question asking follower of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
    I believe the English language is the perfect language for the devil. It is deceptive, adulterous, lying and many lies have been promoted through it.
    So I ask you, How many wives did Jacob have? Or his many wives did the man after God's own heart? KING DAVID? OR king Solomon. Jesus did not marry. And then he declares there will be no marriage in heaven. So just what is ordained as law? David had 7 wives. JACOB 4. SOLOMON 300, Are they going to hell for it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your question. The Bible records what took place in history. It does not necessarily condone what took place. Just because it is written in the Bible, does not mean it is not wrong. Genesis is clear, God created one man and one woman. Anything other than this relationship is a perversion. Including having multiple wives. This does not mean that those who have had multiple wives in the Bible are going to hell, because one does not earn his way to salvation by only being married to one woman. What keeps a person out of heaven is not having Jesus as his or her savior. Jesus says, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." -John 14:6. We cannot earn our salvation by having the correct amount of wives, or by any other means. We are saved through Him alone. "He who has the Son has life. He who does not have the Son of God does not have life." -1 John 5:12. Thanks again, and I hope this helps!

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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]   So,

The Dividing Line of Doctrine

How and Where to Make Divisions... Sometimes, I get asked “Why do you get so up at arms about other religions?” or, “Why do you pick on other religions so much?” I think the following will help you see where I’m coming from, before I spill the beans on such.   We have difficulty sometimes in discovering where to make divisions when considering where to spend our money, and who to support, where to make purchases, and where not to do such. We also often have difficulty on how to know if a church or a congregation is a place where someone can actually become saved. Like, how can we know that a Mormon is likely not saved but we can know that a regular church attender at a gospel sound church is likely saved? What is it that would make my church attendance at a specific body no longer appropriate? Both answers to these questions deal with doctrine. If a company is pushing false doctrine using their influence and power to push a heretical doctrine or teaching, this is often when the red fla

The Highest Virtue

A virtue is a trait of excellence. What is the highest virtue? It seems that based on the nature of truth, that truth itself is perhaps the highest virtue. For instance, I could say that love is the highest virtue, but then I could ask the question of whether that is true or not. If it is or isn’t true, this places truth virtuously higher than love, at least in some sense. The fact that I can question love through the lens of truth seems to place truth above love in height of virtue. On the other hand, if I said that truth is the highest virtue, then it seems that it would be loving to tell others the truth! Perhaps truth and love go hand in hand, but this also concerns the nature of what truth is.  Truth is a requirement for love, which I argue here , but is love a requirement for truth? Love must contain truth in order to be  true  love. But truth does not have to contain love in order to be true truth. Take for instance, mathematics, or numbers in general… Sometimes, the truth hurts

The Two Systems: A Confused Definition of Love

A couple years ago I wrote an article called  the Jehovah’s Witness training videos . The article was meant to be humorous in a sense, because there are likely not any actual training videos, but it seems that they have all watched them. We can suspect this because they all often have the same points of conversation. When you talk about the Trinity, they will use the Bible like a machine gun and shoot you with verses. The verses are always the same: Colossians 1:15, Mark 10:18… So, there is an implication that they all have the same information. There is one source from where they gather their patterns and behaviors. Similarly, I think we can see the power behind the system of the world as well. We can see what this power is like by the tracks he leaves behind. The contrast of the two systems is really seen in Revelation 14:8. “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great, she who made all nations drink the wine of the passion of her sexual immorality.” John is using the word  Babylon  here for

Objectivity is the Language of Heaven

NDErs (i. e. people who have claimed to have had a   Near Death Experience ) often report that when they go to Heaven, they frequently see and recognize people such as friends and family members. It is often also reported that when they were communicating with friends and relatives, they realized that they weren’t speaking English, but that they were telepathically speaking to one another.   It seems it would be impossible to have communication with others without learning every language that has ever existed under the sun, but since heaven is a perfect place, [1]  then communication should be perfect as well. In other words, it seems unlikely that there are barriers to communication. So, I should be able to communicate with the Apostles, upon my arrival for instance, but how? I personally only really know how to speak English fluently. My Spanish, Japanese, German, Russian, Chinese, and Latin is like that of a child, and my Greek is only in reading and writing.  If communication is me

Defending Christianity against Mormonism

“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 . Mormons                                                             Biblical Truths Mormons are monolaters, meaning, they believe in many gods, yet worship only one. LDS believe that “As man is, God once was; and as God is, man may become.” LDS do not believe in Hell. LDS believe God is flesh and bones. LDS believe in baptism for the dead. LDS believe Jesus and Satan are created brothers. LDS do not believe in the Trinity. LDS believe that “it is by grace we are saved, after all we can do” (Nephi 25:23). Deuteronomy 6:4 says, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one” (See also Isaiah 43:11; Acts 5:4; 1 Timothy 2:5; Exodus 20:3; et. al.). God kn

The Evidence and Power of Testimony

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

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 , but the question

Argument from Beauty: Evangelical Christians have Neglected a Favorable Catalyst for the Gospel

It seems to me that some Evangelical Christians have taken a certain biblical passage in the wrong direction. Perhaps I, considering myself to be an Evangelical Christian, am guilty of such as well. Romans 12:1-2 says, “I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.”  Verse 2 is where we get the phrase,  be in the world, but don’t be of the world . What this means is that we should know our place. Our place is in heaven. The Bible says that we are citizens of heaven, and that we should think and act as if we are. Philippians 3:20-21 says, “But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body, b