Christians REACT to LDS Claims About Protestants

Deuteronomy 6 · Deuteronomy 6:4 · John 17:3

My name is Bradley and I am joined today by my friend Sam. Sam runs a channel called Treasuring the King. You got to check it out. He has great content on there. In today's video, we're going to be responding to some content put out by LDS content creators. Let's go ahead and jump right in. David Berso said this. In Christianity, theology is the last refuge of a spiritually weak church. Theology requires no faith, no love, and no sacrifice. A faithless Christian who has no real relationship with God can give mental ascent to a list of doctrines the same as the spiritually strongest Christian can.

So as the church weakened, it began to place greater emphasis on doctrine. By the end of the 3rd century, after an extended period without persecution, bickering between churches over doctrinal issues had become fairly widespread. I like the little guitar riff that he does through the whole thing. It's kind of a nice song. You know, the first thing I think when I watch this is about what Jesus says uh when he's asked what the first and greatest commandment is. You know, man is composed of a mind, a heart. Yeah. So, you have the way we think, our intellect. We have our affections, what we love. Yeah.

Uh and we have a valition, a will, what we choose. And they're all bound together in the nature of what it means to be a human. Part of loving God with all of us is loving God with our mind. And how do we love God with our mind? We don't just come up with vain speculations about him. We don't invent new things. We look at what God has said about himself and then we think his thoughts after him. You know, in most of the gospels, he just says, and you know this, you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, strength. But in Mark, he actually starts his quotation from Deuteronomy 6 just a little bit earlier.

He says, uh, "Here, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one." That's Deuteronomy 6:4. That's the Schma. And then he says, "You shall love the Lord your God." Here, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. That's a theological statement about the nature of God. We can be wholly devoted to God with all of us. We don't have to fracture up our devotion into little parts and pieces like maybe you have to do in a polytheistic worldview. Part of my devotion to this God, part of my devotion to this God. we can give all of ourselves and all of our faculties uh to the Lord because he is one because he is the most high.

And so for Israel moving into Canaan, a polytheistic region, I think that this instruction was relevant for them in Deuteronomy 6 in that era. You know, he said that theology uh doesn't require love. It doesn't require fight faith. On the contrary, I think theology produces love. Absolutely. And I think it is the basis of faith. John 17:3, you know, this is eternal life that they would know you know you the one true God and Jesus Christ whom you have sent or that him who boasts be the one who boasts that they know me. I think also too of just how many times Jesus roots what he is saying in the Old Testament scriptures.

How many times when the apostles are talking about things, they're rooting it in the Old Testament scriptures to support what they're saying to show where it's actually grounded. It's doing theology. It's doing theology. I think one of the implications that he's talking about too though is if I'm just reading scripture just for the sake of learning about God well yeah then there's folly anything that you know anything without love is is is vain but if I want to if I'm looking at the word of God to know God more intimately and deeply well I am studying the things about God like you said to produce more and more of that love and it it will naturally drive those affections the more that I study God I think all the time also about how in the pastoral epistles like time time and time and time again, Paul is like, "Keep watch on your doctrine." Elders need to be able to refute those who contradict sound doctrine.

Romans 12:2 · 1 Corinthians 2 · Matthew 16

You need to correct your opponents with gentleness. Correct your opponents is not just, I think, ethical or moral. It's also doctrinal. I think of Romans 12:2. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may approve what the will of God is, that which is good and pleasing and perfect. It is a command. We ought to be transformed in our mind daily. God talks about sanctifying us. Jesus prays that in John 17. Sanctify them in your truth. Thy word is truth. Amen. Our growth in holiness, our our our being conformed into the image of Jesus from one degree of glory to another is happening through the studying of God's word.

In 1 Corinthians 2, Paul says, uh, "Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom, but taught by the spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual." So he says, "We receive the spirit, the Holy Spirit, so that we can understand the things given to us by God." Well, what's been given to us by God? Revelation. His word's been given to us. And the spirit helps us to understand it. And he doesn't seem to say, "Well, it doesn't really matter if you rightly understand the things that have been revealed." That's theology.

No, it matters tremendously. You know, also this is just a little internally inconsistent because Latter Day Saints do theology all the time. Joseph Smith did theology. You read Joseph Smith sermons, read the King Follow Discourse. We bring it up all the time. Read the Sermon in the Grove. Those are theological sermons. I think they're blasphemous, but they're theological. He's arguing logically, systematically about a nature of the cosmos, about the nature of God that's doing theology. Would you say that that is an indication of a weak church? Uh, I don't think so. I'll end this section uh just with what John writes in second John.

He says, "Everyone who goes on and does not abide in the teaching of Christ does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the father and the son. If you do not abide because it's good doctrinal teachings, then you don't have the sun. Let's move on to the next one, shall we? Protestant churches are a collection of Bible study groups who get together and talk about how much they love Jesus and share a common set of beliefs and try and do what Jesus said. Now, that is a good thing, but that's not the church as Christ set it up. The Catholic Church claims authority. They claim to be a church because they claim keys.

And so the question for the Protestants that I ask, who holds the keys? And their best answer they can say, nobody, cuz keys aren't what you think they are. I don't think Jacob Hansen has actually interacted substantially with Protestant ecclesiology based off of this because we absolutely have answers about the keys. And there is a difference in our own theology between a Bible study and a church. Yeah. So the word church is in its Greek word is literally the word for assembly. It is the gathering of believers. We get the language of the keys from Matthew 16 and Matthew 18. In Matthew 16 after Peter's confession that you are the Christ, the son of the living God, Jesus says, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjonah.

Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. So the keys of the kingdom are related to presumably the binding and loosing activity of Peter and I think by extension the apostles. The other time it shows up is in Matthew 18 when Jesus is talking about what should you do if your brother sins against you.

Matthew 18:15 · Matthew 18 · Galatians 1

Matthew 18:15 he says if your brother sins against you go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. And if he listens, you've gained your brother. If not, take one or two others along with you. And then he says, if he still refuses to listen to two or three witnesses, tell it to the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a gentile and a tax collector. Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven. Whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again, I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my father in heaven.

For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them. So you have that same binding and loosing that he spoke of in Matthew 16. Uh so the authority to bind and loose is contained in the keys. But what's really significant is that in Matthew 16, whatever you bind and whatever you loose is actually a singular U. It's referencing Peter. But in Matthew 18 that U is plural. It's not whatever you particularly bind and loose. It's whatever you broadly bind and loose. Who who's the you referring to? It's referring to the gathering of the church. The two or three that are gathered. So now we're Baptists, so this is a very Baptist ecclesiology.

It's just worth noting that. But we believe that the keys are held and exercised by the gathering of God's people together in the church, which is literally the word for gathering. And what is binding and loosing? Well, it's used in the context here of excommunication. It's identifying the boundaries of the church. It's the authority to gather in Christ's name and say you are a part of this body or you are not a part of this body. So you think of 1 Corinthians chapter 5, you know, there's this individual he he's talking about that a man has taken his father's wife and Paul talks about in verse 5 to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh for this purpose so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.

There is a judgment essentially that is being uh given and that's what he goes on to say in verse 12 says for what do I have to do with judging outsiders? Are you not to judge those who are within the church but those who are outside God will judge remove the wicked man from among yourselves? That's the point of doing this is one admonishing or rebuking this individual uh that their soul would be saved which is why the church itself has the authority to do something like that and that they would be saved at the end of the day but also too just a little love and love is a whole lot. We don't want this kind of attitude persisting throughout the church.

That's what you see in First Corinthians. It's just kind of like spreading throughout. You think additionally too, if you're going to bring something up about an elder that it needs to be done, a charge against an elder needs to be done on against two or three witnesses. So, it's not as though this elder has all the authority over the church to tell the church what to do. That is representative of the church itself exercising that authority even over elders. In Galatians 1, Paul starts off by saying, "If we or an angel from heaven Yeah. Yeah. Preaches a different gospel. Now, we always focus in on the angel from heaven part.

But notice the we the we Paul speaking. Great question. The apostles. If Paul is an apostle comes and speaks a different gospel, he has no authority. And the church ought to hold him accountable and he is condemned. Uh and so authority is not separated from the confession that Peter makes. You are the Christ, the son of the living God. If you deny that confession by your works or, you know, by your confession, you have no authority. If you have a bishop of a church who ends up denying that Jesus rose from the dead, does he still have authority? Uh, is he in a position of authority? No, because he's denied the confession.

Matthew 28

So, how does someone gain authority? Well, ultimately, who gives people authority? God does. God authorates us. God gives authority. Yeah. So we believe that when Jesus in Matthew 28 gives authority that authority is exercised by all those who share the confession of Peter are followers of Jesus and are organized into local churches. Matthew has this motif of authority. Actually you you have so many parables and stories where Jesus is exercising authority verbally. You have Jesus calming the storm. Uh he simply speaks and the storm quiets down and the people marvel. Who is this that even the wind and the waves obey him?

Uh you have the centurion who comes and says I'm a man man of authority. I say go do this and they do that. I say come here and they come here. So I know that you're a man of authority Jesus. Say the word and my servant will be healed. And Jesus says the word. So when you get to Matthew 28 and you have all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Jesus. And he says therefore because he has all authority, go make disciples, baptize, teach. Because he's been given all authority, therefore he gives authority to his followers. Go. And there's no laying on of hands. He is verbally exercising that authority to his followers.

So we do believe we have authority. We do believe we've been authorized by God, by Jesus who has received all authority in heaven and on earth. When Peter goes to Cornelius and the Gentiles, while he was still speaking, the Holy Spirit descended on. There was no laying on of hands. It was clearly their hearts had already been transformed. They received the gift of the Holy Spirit. And that's why we can exercise this gift, the keys in the church, because it's not just a bunch of these fleshly individuals. It is the very spirit of God in every one of them that binds us through love to be able to exercise this authority.

It's God in us. Exactly. This is why it's so significant when Jesus says where two or three are gathered in my name. Boom. I'm there among them. Beautiful. Jesus is saying I'm present in that gathering. His authority is present in the binding and loosing with the gathering of the church in his name. Now, one of the things that as Protestants we hold dearly is this idea of a visible and an invisible church. So, there are multiple visible churches. There's only one invisible church. You know, we see all over the New Testament the language of unity. One Lord, one faith, one baptism. There's a unity that binds together all believers in Christ.

And yet, we go to different local expressions of the invisible church, different local churches. I know that some people have likened a local church to an embassy. At an embassy, you can get your passport stamped. You're affirmed as a citizen. You're recognized as a citizen. It is your home soil, your home turf. It's where other citizens come to in a foreign nation. It's kind of like what a church is. We're in the world, but we're actually an outpost of the kingdom of heaven. We can get our passport stamped. We can get our citizenship affirmed. We are recognized to be a part of God's people. And that's how we think of a local church.

Well, let's move on to uh the next one here, shall we? Are there lots of contradictions in the New Testament? I don't I don't think there are. Sure there are. Who's the father of Joseph? Jesus's stepdad. Who's the father of Joseph? I don't I'd have to look back into the genealogy. You want to look at it? Sure, we can look at it. I believe it to be the ultimate authority. Yeah, but why do you believe that? When did God say the Bible was the ultimate authority? He doesn't ever say that, right? says, "Jacob begott Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born uh Jesus who is called Christ." Okay. So, his name is Jacob.

Luke 3:23

Yeah. Okay. Now, go to see here Luke 3:23. Uh at about 30 years of age, being as was supposed the son of Joseph, the son of Heli, the son of what's that? So, you have Jacob as his dad in one gospel and then in another gospel it's Heli. So the question is why are those contradicting each other? I do think it shows us that the Bible's not infallible as far as perfect. Yeah. I think if you look at just any commentary, virtually any commentary, they're going to all come to the same conclusion that when you look at Luke 3:23, there's a there's a little comma as was supposed a statement put there that is meant to differentiate between the lineage of Joseph, which we see in Matthew chapter 1, and the lineage of Mary, which we see in Luke chapter 3.

Very simple. Yeah. Yeah. We just see that as genealogies, two different family lines, one for Mary, one for Joseph. The bigger issue here is actually the perspective about infallibility generally and the nature of Bible contradiction. So, I actually do think it matters tremendously uh whether or not the Bible is infallible because the source of us claiming it's infallible is rooted in what we're saying scripture actually is. We believe that the Bible is infallible and inherent because we believe it is the very word of God. Not that it is the record of what a prophet received by revelation. It's the human record of that event, but that it is God speaking and revealing himself to humanity by means of a human author.

I've been saying this lately, might have even seen a recent video of mine where I say this. You can quote a line from the Bible and say God said quotation mark and quote that end quote. If it is God's word, if it is actually speech from God, then by definition of what it is, it has to be infallible because God is infallible. I would say that the issue of Bible contradictions uh absolutely matters, but our presupposition is going to affect a lot of how we come to these. If we presuppose the Bible is God's word, then we will work really hard to resolve apparent difficulties in the Bible. I am not denying that there are issues that are apparent difficulties in scripture.

I think the vast majority of those can be rightly understood and the issue resolved. But I'm not denying that there are difficulties. But the existence of difficulty does not make the thing itself untrue. It just means it's a difficulty. I've been there. I've looked at scriptures and I and I had troubles with it. you know, I thought there was difficulties and there's stuff that really really challenged me, but it it was nothing that I couldn't go in and do some research, look at some different commentaries, um, hear people talk about it and discuss it from a perspective like that that makes complete sense.

Why do I believe that God spoke in scripture? Why do I believe that it's actually inspired, that it's God breathed, and that its origin is is from God? This is the very speech of God. our subjective experience is saying this is God's word and then this evidences itself to be God's word. So I think the nature of our subjective experience is different and then we put our weight not on the subjective experience but on the objective claims of scripture about itself. It's like the subjective experience is what makes me apprehend and grasp what scripture says about itself. Latter-day Saints don't seem to emphasize the content of the Book of Mormon as it the determiner for everything else.

So, it's not as though they pray to know that the Book of Mormon is true and then the claims of the Book of Mormon illuminate everything else in the world. We're saying that we have a subjective experience that the Bible is God's word and that as God's word, it illuminates every other part of life. So, I think that our subjective experiences are different. Though, I'm not denying that, of course, we have a subjective uh testimony, if you want to use that word, that scripture is actually God's word. In everything, you have what I sometimes call a prime determiner of truth. It's like your epistemological ceiling.

John 10 · 2 Corinthians 3

It's it's what everything uh comes out of in terms of truth. For us, the Bible is our epistemological center. It is our prime determiner of truth. So, why do I believe that scripture is God's word? Because scripture speaks as though scripture is God's word. That's why this is my epistemological foundation. What does God say about God's word? What does God's word say about God's word? And I don't think it's even logically proper to say, "Well, that's inappropriate because it's circular." All epistemological foundations are circular. If man's reason is meant to be our prime determiner of truth, how do you come to the conclusion that your reason is your prime determiner of truth?

Your epistemological ceiling. Well, because you think it is. Reason led you to believe that reason is ultimate. It's just as circular as saying that the Bible leads me to believe that the Bible is the prime determiner of truth. But I believe that the Bible is a whole lot more reliable than my own reason. Everyone is circular. Yeah. The question is which circle accounts for the nature of reality best? And I would argue that I was. Yeah. And with that, if you think about God having to kind of point to something else to say, see, you know what I'm saying is true because of this. Well, now that thing is becoming the authority instead of himself.

The word of God is true because God says it's true. So when somebody comes to you and says it doesn't need to be infallible. Well, it claims to be. It it does. The word it's the very word of God. And by nature, can God make mistakes? No, he can't make mistakes. Impossible for God to lie. Impossible. So if this is God's word and he is impossible for God to lie, well then this it naturally follows that this is authoritative. It makes those claims. Jesus in John 10 scripture cannot be broken. It can't be. I wanted to say in a subjective sense we believe there's a spiritual dimension to the way people view the Bible.

This is not just an intellectual thing. It's not just an appeal to scholarship. The appeal to scholarship thing gets me because I have scholars who agree with me. You have scholars that agree with you. Who scholars are better scholars? I mean, we could play that game. It's a really good point. Uh, but I I think that there's a real spiritual issue. In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul talks about that there were the Jewish people he was speaking to when they read the Old Testament, a veil lies over their heart. They don't rightly understand what Moses is saying. When in first Corinthians 2, Paul says, "The natural person doesn't accept the things of the spirit of God, they are folly to him.

He is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned." If we believe there's a spiritual darkness so that there is an inability to recognize God's word for what it is. It's not just an intellectual thing. It's not just a a scholarship thing. It's a heart thing. It's an issue with the soul. It's a problem with sin. Sin has clouded our vision so that we don't hear God's word when he speaks. And so when Jesus in John 10, he talks about my sheep know my voice. They don't listen to the voice of another. They know my voice. We believe that the reason so many people look at God's word and they throw it aside is because there's a veil over their hearts because of sin.

Yeah. If I get exalted, if I go to heaven and people I love are burning in hell that it seems like Christ failed to really assume all that he promised he could. This is a view people hold like Thomas Aquinas said that the felicity of those in heaven will be made greater by witnessing their struggles and their pain and their suffering. So if I go and I go to get to heaven and I'm not there with Baylor or my wife or someone else, then that's not perfection. I'd say that the base assumption here that I think is a problematic assumption is that God's ultimate purpose is for the maximum number of people to be in heaven to be in eternity with him.

Ezekiel 36 · Exodus 33 · 1 Corinthians 6

If you have that presupposition, then it seems like God failed, that he's impotent, that he hasn't accomplished the things that he wants to accomplish. And I would say it is not a biblical position to say that God's greatest highest goal in good is for the maximum maximum number of people to be saved. No. God's highest purpose in good is to glorify himself. We don't believe in hell because we're sadistic, grumpy people. We believe in hell because when you read the New Testament, the inescapable conclusion is that judgment is coming and that the result of judgment is eternal. It's said multiple times in multiple ways by multiple authors, not just in the New Testament, but also in the Old Testament.

Next time you're reading the Old Testament, especially the prophets, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah in particular, look at the way God speaks about both judgment and salvation. I think the Old Testament, for the record, is the backdrop of the New Testament. We understand the grace and mercy of Christ when we understand the judgment and justice of God displayed in the Old Testament. But you read these sections like in Ezekiel 36, God is like, "It's not for your sake that I'm about to act. It's not for your sake, oh house of Israel. It's for the sake of my name. God works some things so that people are saved to exalt his mercy and grace.

And he also works things so that people are judged in accordance with their own works to the praise of his justice and holiness. Uh Exodus 33, Moses makes a request. He says, "I pray you, show me your glory." And God's answer is very interesting. And he says, "I myself will make all my goodness pass before you." Which is interesting about this is if you get to the heart of why people have such a hard time with hell. It really is an attack on God's moral character. It's it's not a good thing that God would do that. And here he is. He said, "I'm going to make my goodness pass before you and I will proclaim the name of Yahweh before you." And then he defines his name down here in Exodus chapter 34 when he passes through.

This is Yahweh showing Moses his glory. This is who he is, says Yahweh, Yahweh, God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in loving kindness and truth, who keeps loving kindness for thousands, who forgives iniquity, transgression, and sin. Yet he will by no means leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations. And so you see this like aspect of God that he is willing to wipe away the sins. Every single sin, lying, fornication, sexual immorality, murder, everything. He is willing to wipe it all away.

He's willing to forgive, pardon, and graciously receive man to himself through the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, who paid for our sins. But for those who reject it, he says, "By no means am I going to leave the guilty unpunished." And here's what we see in Revelation chapter 21. He says, "But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and sexually immoral persons and sorcers and idoltors and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death. This is the reality of hell." And so when we think about God's judgment, for God to just simply pardon, just look over all these things without having an account for those would be unjust.

It wouldn't be righteous. God would not be a good judge. He would not be some like he he would not be who he says he is, namely holy and good and and and just. I think too uh because a lot of times I'll point people to, you know, Revelation chapter 21. You can go to 1 Corinthians 6. He names another list of people. They're not going to inherit the kingdom of God. But Jesus again gives us a very clear visual of the rich man and Lazarus of what is happening with the rich man and Lazarus. Lazarus dies. He's this poor man. These dogs literally lick his sores and you have this rich man who feasts and just lives this seemingly abundant life.

Matthew 24 · Mosiah 5

And then he also dies. There's nothing specific that's attributed to him. He was an idoltor. He's a murderer. It's just the rich man died. The guy that was living a great life and the poor man who was seemingly suffering died. One goes off to what we would call the bosom of Abraham. He's being comforted. And then the rich man is suffering in a place that is but that's that's hot. It's there's fire there. And the rich man is crying out in agony saying, "Have Lazarus dip his finger in water to go put it on my tongue for this place that is is causing me to suffer with agony." There Abraham responds.

He says, "You had your good things in your life and Lazarus is bad and now you are in misery and Lazarus is being comforted." Jesus is making absolutely abundantly clear the reality of what happens after we perish. There is a place of torment. There is a place of absolute utter joy and peace and love in Jesus. And the only way the only way that we can receive that sweetness to be part of the kingdom of God is simply to repent and trust in the Lord Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of my sins. I think it's really significant that in that parable, he talks about how there's a great chasm, a great gulf between us so that you cannot cross from one side to the other.

I think about Matthew 24 and 25, Jesus is talking about the end times and stuff. And when talking about the separation of of the sheep from the goats at final judgment, he talks about the goats will he'll say to them, "Depart from me, you cursed into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels." He goes on to say, "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." and also just the language. There's so many texts you could go to, but these are the ones that came into my mind right now. The very beginning of 2 Thessalonians speaking about Jesus's return.

He says there, "God also considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well to as to us. When the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus, they will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might. When he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints and to be marveled at among all who have believed. In Romans nine, Paul talks about how both vessels of wrath prepared for destruction and vessels of mercy uh who receive the riches of his grace.

Both of them serve to glorify God. Pharaoh, he rose up to destroy Pharaoh so that his power would be made known and the wisdom of God. These things converge at the cross where the justice of God, the holiness and the wrath of God met with the love of God, the grace and the mercy of God, perfect justice on display and perfect grace. Let's continue on here. Let's just say Bryce or anyone else who's like, "You want to evangelize Mormons?" You meet someone and they've been like, "Oh yeah, I've been reading the Book of Mormon. This is what I learned." says right here in Mosiah 5'8, "And under this head ye are made free, and there is no other head whereby ye can be made free.

There is no other name given whereby salvation cometh. Therefore, I would that ye should take upon you the name of Christ, all that you have entered into the covenant with God, and that you should be obedient unto the ends of your lives." Like someone has said, "Hey, I've been reading the Book of Mormon, and I've come to this testimony of Jesus, and that his name is the only name under heaven that can make me free." And then you just carelessly come into this person's life and be like, "Oh yeah, that's demonic. That's not true." And that person's gonna become an atheist because you're breaking down their beliefs, giving them nothing to replace it.

Timothy 2:24

That's not evangelism. How is that progressing the work of God at all? I want to at least sympathize with the spirit of what he's saying, which is if you just try to tear down people's faith in Mormonism and leave it at that, well, now they're atheists. What does that benefit them? He's right. That is not evangelism. It's not. Jesus said, "What does it profit a man if he gains the world and forfeits his soul?" Or sometimes I reword it to say, "What does it profit a man if he realizes Mormonism is false and loses his soul?" Nothing. Uh, and so our aim is not to poke holes at Mormonism and walk away and say, "Well, bummer.

Have fun." We want to point people to the gospel and to what the truth is about who God is and what he's done in Christ. But I don't think it's true then to say that we can't at all point out the issues in Mormonism. We ought to point out the issues and things that are false and then point to things that are true. I think too when we get into these discussions a lot of the time it's mistaken to think that we're just here to correct a doctrine or correct theology just for the sake of saying okay well you had a wrong mis wrong definition of grace I'm going to correct your definition of grace well the reality of the situation is that the atheist and the and the latter-day saint that that holds to Mormon doctrine they're both going to end up in the same place the result is exactly the same but our aim is far greater than this than this temporary world our aim is for their eternal salvation.

And so when we're going and having these discussions with people, it's exactly like what Paul talks about. He's like, the love of Christ compels us or controls us. He wants to know nothing except Christ and him crucified. We are not here to just tear people down and to make them feel bad about their belief systems. We are here because of the reality of the situation is that there is a day coming that nobody knows that Jesus is going to return and he's he's going to separate the goats from the sheep and he's going to judge them and we do not want people being found under the law. We want them to be found in Christ.

I think a lot of Latter-day Saints have this view of Christianity that kind of were the the elementary school Christianity and they're like the PhD level. There's more truth that they have. There's more information. And then I think when they think about our disagreements with Mormonism, they often take that same paradigm and apply it on our thoughts as though we believe, oh, we're the PhD and you're the kindergarten. Like, you just need more truth, a little bit of correction. That's not what we think. And I say this for clarity, not to be mean, but just to be clear, we believe that Latter-day Saints are severed from Christ.

Yeah. To use the language of Paul. That's good. That they don't know God. That they don't have a genuine faith. That they are not forgiven. that they do not have the Holy Spirit and they are not going to dwell with Heavenly Father if they persist in the doctrines that have been taught by the LDS apostles and prophets. The gospel as presented by LDS leaders is not the gospel. It's not good news. It's more law that condemns. And so our concern is to not just give more information and make slight adjustments, but to say you need to repent. You need to turn away from the false teachings of your so-called apostles and prophets and turn in faith to the gospel of grace.

Paul writes in second Timothy 2:24 and following. The Lord's servant must not be quarrelome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. There's a real element of correction here. Correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil after being captured by him to do his will. And we believe that there are so many Latter-day Saints who are captured in the snare of the devil. And we pray and labor that they may perhaps be granted repentance coming to a knowledge of the truth.

Thank you so much for watching. Again, uh check out Sam's channel, Treasuring the King. And if you have any questions or comments or other videos you'd like for us to respond to, throw them down below in the comments. May the Lord bless you. May the Lord grant you an understanding of the things that he he's revealed in his word. And God bless.