Pastors REACT to Latter-day Saint Articles of Faith

[@HelloSaints]

Rumor has it we missed a few things. Fill me in? What did I miss?

[@natedawg2020]

I thought you did a good job. Haters gonna hate

[@BGCflyer]

...actually I think it was well done. If you want to be more thorough, you could set up another "Council of Trent"...but, I think that would be exhausting.

[@zionmama150]

Here’s my assessment after watching the whole thing: 1- Bible translations that Joseph Smith brought in: they are not talking about word for word translation. Joseph Smith received clarifying revelation and that is what was meant by “as far as it is translated correctly”. 2- As an evangelical outsider, Calvinists seem to believe in God’s authority to make our choices for us. That is the idea that we are rejecting by having the 2nd article of faith. We have our agency and God gave it to us and does not usurp it on an individual basis. Our choices lead to the consequences (fruit) that are ordained for various choices. So taking one fruit will lead to one result and another fruit leads to another result. We are telling Calvinism by A of F #2 that they are wrong to tell Christians that just because they have a fallen nature that they cannot choose to rise above it through the atonement of Christ. God’s grace is abundant for all who call on His name and those who ask will receive the ability to overcome sin. Step by step. To me, looking from an outside perspective to evangelical Christianity, I see that the idea that God even controls our choice to be chosen puts people in a place of telling God the blame is on him rather than themselves, and that leads to people being stuck in their sin-pits instead of rising out of them. I think evangelical Christianity and its rejection of works are necessary to show faith emphasis is harmful to Christians and I believe it is that very thing that has led America to its downfall and pride cycle. That may be an interesting discussion to have some time. 3- Gift of Tongues means two things: ability to speak other languages (which is still experienced today - I personally have had that experience). But it also means to speak the heavenly language that is not corrupt or to tap into other languages frequencies to speak their language without any book learning about it. I thought the conversation was mostly pretty fair, but as a Saint, I wanted to say “but there’s so much more to consider”. Like the fact that God can add through a prophet to His own word, like He demonstrated when He called Isaiah and Jeremiah. They wrote more word past Deuteronomy 12. So not sure why God’s word has to be looked at as 66 books.

[@incogneato790]

Rejecting the idea of original sin isn't about disagreeing about the nature of man, it is a disagreement about when we are accountable to God for and what for. We LDS would agree that man is born with a fallen nature that will cause us to give in to temptation and sin. But we do not hold it a sin to simply have that nature. We did nothing to cause ourselves to be that way and it would be unjust of God to damn us for something we are born with and that is fully beyond our control. Instead we are accountable to God for our own actions which we do have control over (once we are old enough to understand right and wrong). Since small children lack the intellect to be accountable for their actions they are sinless even while they may do things that are wrong. Likewise for those who have issues with their mental development that would make it unjust to hold them accountable for their actions. Furthermore, Adam and Eve partook of the forbidden fruit before they had a knowledge of good and evil, so while they transgressed God's command, they were not in a state where it could be counted as sin, they were as small children. Once they partook however and had that knowledge, they became accountable for all their actions after that.

[@esm1817]

I think you did well. I wonder if a lot of viewers are used to the old format where you dialogue with a Latter-day Saint. With nobody to be the "push" to your "pull" and the "pull" to your push, I think some people are mistaking your approach for a "correction" of Latter-day Saint theology. I do think sitting down with a Latter-day Saint would be helpful, but I'm about halfway through the video and I get where you're coming from so far. A lot of this stuff seems so much like splitting hairs, but when it matters is when you base an entire theology on the principles. Suddenly small points like the minutiae of what exactly each denomination believes about original sin seem so important because we spend so much internalizing them into our worldviews. About original sin--I feel like Latter-day Saints have the perception that many other Christians feel like Adam made this terrible, terrible decision and everything about it was just terrible. In contrast to what we perceive (perhaps wrongly) about other denominations, we have a lot of respect for Adam and Eve as our first parents and for their choice in the Garden of Eden. We would say that the Fall was something that God knew we would experience. In fact, the Fall was His whole reason for letting His children exist on a separate plane from Himself. He planned for us to have to make decisions, He knew we had to grow by choosing and therefore making mistakes. So from the beginning Jesus was God's choice as the Head of the Church of God here on Earth, and the only way any of us (even Adam) could make it back to God was through Jesus Christ. So although the fall (and Adam and Eve) did introduce us to a carnal, fallen world, it was a necessary step in our learning and a necessary part of bringing us to Jesus Christ. So are we punished for Adam's transgressions? No. Each man suffers eternal consequences for his own sins. But we do suffer in another sense because of a lot of other people's decisions. And that's part of our progress as humans. Adam is the one who introduced us to growth while in our bodies He did that through his decision, which led us to live in a fallen, sinful world. But it was the experience of choosing and therefore having true agency that causes us to sin, therefore to choose better next time and grow. So God isn't still punishing mankind. In fact, He wasn't punishing mankind by sending them to a fallen world. He was setting them onto the path whereby they could learn and grow most fully. Our eternal punishment for the decisions we make will be for just that. I picture Him saying, "Now I put you here, and I gave you this. And let's see what you chose to do with that? Did you personally reconcile yourself to God? Did you do your best to teach and learn of Me?" And at the Judgment, that's where the distinction becomes important. He's only looking at each of us as individuals, not saying, "All of mankind is under damnation because of what Adam specifically did." So more even than the doctrine, there's a different feel to Latter-day Saint theology in that regard. About being saved and ordinances. I think it's a good cycle. We experience God's grace, which leads us to do works and receive ordinances, which leads us to then experience a greater degree of divine help and want to serve God more, and then God helps us more, and on and on. But being saved is a thing that's never over. But God always extends us more mercies than we've ever been able to earn so in the beginning, middle, and end, it's Jesus Christ who has saved us, is saving us currently, and will continue to save us in the future as we also do things that show that we would like that tender mercy in our lives.

[@nicolecaulder5818]

Having a member of the LDS church could've helped round out this discussion. You guys clarify your beliefs well, but no one is clarifying the articles.

[@sh1pp]

I see your point, but I think a lot of us members might think giving the articles of faith to evangelicals would inform them about our faith and I think it’s interesting to see what they are thinking as they read them. Most of his videos have the LDS perspective and he will follow up and read comments to fill out his learning.

[@cumomsandcureloms]

THe guy on the left IS a member!

[@dared6341]

You are talking without clarifying or envite member of latter day saints. Its just you making explanation base on your belief.

[@DeliverQuality]

I have said this ten thousand times, and I will say it again: Christ paid the price for all men to be saved from physical death regardless of what they do; but Christ’s payment for our sins does not change us despite ourselves. It satisfied the demands of justice and gave us the ability to repent and change, thereby releasing us from having to pay for our own sins. This means we must still change, which requires action on our part in order to access forgiveness for our sins. Christ paved the road to salvation, but we still have to walk it.

[@Crikey420]

You will probably have to keep saying this another ten thousand times. Too many corrupted understandings of pure and simple doctrine

[@Elizabeth-rk3do]

Everyone will be resurrected. We don't need to be saved from this. Christ requires perfection. Matthew 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect.

[@ralphmiller2265]

Well said.

[@BGCflyer]

…so do you believe God works in us first? Or do we by our own effort change our hearts?

[@aliunde]

@@BGCflyer It would be impossible to repent without the atonement & without God's grace working within us. (2 Nephi 9:7-9)

[@ReachingForTheBrightestStar]

HOLLYWOOD actress Dana Kimmell joined the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints thanks to the wonderful truths mentioned in the 13 articles of faith. Speaking of 13, she was the star of Friday the 13th part 3 but later left Hollywood to focus her life to Latter-day Saint celestial living. I’m so grateful she did. Changed MY life forever…She’s my MOM. I wrote a book about her inspiring story available on Amazon, REACHING FOR THE BRIGHTEST STAR. I hope you read it and are uplifted and strengthened by it. God bless you all. -Kyle Dane

[@rdancranston]

This is so cool. Ill be looking for the book...😁

[@ReachingForTheBrightestStar]

@@rdancranston thank you! I hope the book uplifts you and merits an honest positive review on Amazon 😊🙏🌟

[@Jace28142]

I too will be reading your Mom’s book. She is a wonderful example to so many people m.

[@RoyalXFash]

Wow, that’s actually really cool!

[@DKWalser]

They were wrong to say that the restoration of the 10 Tribes is a reference to the Nephites and Lamanites. It's a reference to the Lost 10 Tribes of Israel. The Nephites and Lamanites are only a small part of the 10 Tribes.

[@keybgbeez5713]

It's 12...

[@DKWalser]

@@keybgbeez5713 You are correct. There are 12 Tribes of Israel. However, we were speaking of the 10 Tribes that made up the Kingdom of Israel (as opposed to the Kingdom of Judah). Those 10 tribes were captured by Assyria and were taken to the north. They were lost to history and are considered the Lost 10 Tribes of Israel.

[@haydenvanmeeteren5127]

@@keybgbeez5713 There are 10 of them that are considered lost.

[@keybgbeez5713]

@@DKWalser ahh okay. Since in a patriarchal blessing you can be from the lineages of any of the 12 I didn't consider them lost

[@angesmambassa8549]

Yes, they are the descendants of Joseph from Egypt the son of Jacob, Ephraim and Manassa are only the one tribe.

[@davidbixler8322]

After 35 years being in A member of A Pentecostal Church, the best change I made was becoming A member of the Church Of Jesus Christ of latter Day Saints. The fruits of the church can not be denied.

[@PaulaRoberts-q6j]

Thats a huge jump! I'm curious about your faith journey

[@PaulaRoberts-q6j]

❤

[@tuialailima5540]

After 28 years being a member of the Methodist church, I joined The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints! It saved my life! I remember meeting with missionaries much younger than me to learn about the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ. As they concluded every lesson, they would invite me to pray and seek my own answers, reminding me not to blindly believe what they taught but to find a personal witness from Father in Heaven. And, man, those answers came! “My beloved friends, our prayers are our sweetest hour, our most sincere desire, our simplest, purest form of worship. We should pray individually, in our families, and in congregations of all sizes. We’re to employ prayer as a shield against temptation and if there be any time we feel not to pray, we can be sure that hesitancy does not come from God who yearns to communicate with his children at any and all times. Indeed some efforts to keep us from praying come directly from the adversary and when we don’t know how or exactly for what to pray, we should begin and continue until the Holy Spirit guides us into the prayer we should be offering.” - Elder Jeffrey R Holland

[@briandavis6898]

Three is a response to Calvinism which condemns people to hell bases on circumstance, that God chose don't to be born into situations where they cannot find Jesus

[@briandavis6898]

#4 ties to #3. Baptism is necessary for salvation. That's a difference in some protestant belief. Baptism is not works and I think the emphasis on salvation through works has negated the necessity of baptism

[@auntkaren9412]

“Not for Adam’s transgression” is related to the baptism of infants. Infants are born innocent and children do not require baptism until they can reason what is right and wrong.

[@MRxMADHATTER]

And if Adam and Eve had never sinned, they would never have left the Garden and we would still just be spirits. So Adam's "transgression" was actually necessary to obey the commandment to go forth and multiply.

[@germanmarine6582]

yes, also, that we are not accountible for other peoples sins. if my father sins, or my friends sin, that is not a sin that is reflected in me.

[@stevencraven4897]

This phrase addresses the doctrinal concept of "original sin", taught in the Catholic churches.

[@BGCflyer]

@@MRxMADHATTER ...so you don't believe Adam and Eve had physical bodies? Why did God command them to multiply BEFORE they transgressed? Genesis 1:28 "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth," this was before they transgressed, not after. God would never ask them to do something they couldn't do. That would be deceiving them which only the Devil would do.

[@GrandmaKnightLife]

What if you can reason right from wrong before the age of 8?

[@captainsirk1173]

My biggest question for mainstream Christianity has to do with the number of people claiming that Latter Day Saints go to hell, specifically for beliefs pertaining to the Godhead. In what world is an improper interpretation of the incomprehensible nature of God a damnable offense? Latter Day Saints are certainly known to bear the symptoms of Christian discipleship. Jesus said his disciples would be known by their love one to another. I simply can’t imagine that God would send a faithful Latter Day Saint who devoted their life to understanding his Gospel to eternal damnation simply because their best efforts to find the truth were not enough.

[@mycatwould]

Also, those who judge and consider damned may want to re-read the “with what measure ye mete” scripture again and look inside rather than outside.

[@germanmarine6582]

And that’s one reason I’m not a Protestant honestly. I don’t think getting your theology incorrect is grounds for eternal damnation or punishment. It’s about the heart and character.

[@Elizabeth-rk3do]

Every Latter-day Saint knows that God exists. Someone created the planet that their Heavenly Father came from and the star Kolob that he lives near. Someone created all his wives. Why don't they worship the Creator? It's idolatry to worship a created being. Romans 1:18-25 It breaks the first and second commandments. Idolaters will be cast into the lake of fire. Revelation 21:8 Latter-day Saints have a Bible. They know that Jesus Christ claimed to be God. Christ was crucified because he claimed to be God. Heavenly Father said that his Son was God. Hebrews 1:8 Why do Latter-day Saint believe that Jesus Christ is lying and that he is a created being the brother of Satan? Jesus Christ told the Pharisees that they were of their father the devil because they refused to believe that he was God. (John 8) Christ said that their sins would not be forgiven and they would be condemned. Was Jesus Christ lying? God looks on the heart. No one in hell will ever be able to say that they don't belong there. Luke 16 The rich man in hell never complained that he didn't deserve to be there.

[@germanmarine6582]

@@Elizabeth-rk3do say you dont know mormonism without saying you dont know mormonism XD

[@stephtimms1776]

@@Elizabeth-rk3do Was Jesus Christ's body created? We believe he is an eternal being. That's who we worship! Why do you keep repeating falsehoods? Please stop.

[@MrReecehayden]

I understand 'speaking in tongues' and 'interpretation of tongues' as speaking another language. Ie. When i went on my mission in Mexico i didnt speak Spanish (other than what i learned from friends on the soccer field) but i was able to pick it up and speak conversationally with people within 3 months. I personally feel i was blessed with the gift of tongues for that purpose.

[@scottvance74]

Your interpretation of the "gift of tongues" is consistent with what the church has taught since about 1900. However, until banned by church leadership in the early 1920s, glossalelia was pretty common, especially among women in the church. This isn't discussed too much in sunday school these days.

[@princessadora]

i don't think thats what speaking in tongues means

[@ronwebb8332]

If you want a comprehensive discussion of the Articles of Faith, I recommend the book "The Articles of Faith" by James E Talmage. (available at most any LDS bookstore.)

[@sama.scraps]

I think it online for free too!

[@TheWrath2010]

He doesn't want to know. He only wants to cast doubts. I laugh at how blind you all are.

[@kennabruno7465]

@@TheWrath2010 A lot of good can still and has come from this. A lot of truth has been told.

[@sioux9468]

The Godhead is not to be confused with or related to the Trinity. The Godhead, to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is like a presidency, with a president and two counselors/vice presidents. They work together AS one body (united in mind, purpose, etc.) but not IN one body. They are three separate beings.

[@natedawg2020]

In Spanish, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints uses the word “Trinidad.” Maybe if there was a word for Godhead in Spanish, we’d use that instead. Sometimes I wonder if we shouldn’t reject the word “Trinity” so much in English and focus on reclaiming it. We already use our own definitions for other words.

[@aliunde]

@@natedawg2020 We believe in the Trinity, just not the Triune (or Tripersonal) God. Apostle James E. Talmage used the word Trinity to refer to the Godhead in his book "Jesus the Christ". We do believe, however, that the Godhead can be referred to as one God in their unity (as the Book of Mormon does so). The persons of the Godhead are still separate and distinct beings in their complete unity, however, unlike Trinitarianism.

[@Compulsive-Elk7103]

Polytheism

[@joesimpson9230]

But that is not how God is described in the Book of Mormon and by Joseph Smith. Mosiah 8:28-32 RLDS (15:1-5 LDS) And now Abinadi saith unto them: "I would that ye should understand that God Himself shall come down among the children of men and shall redeem His people; And because He dwelleth in flesh, He shall be called the Son of God; And having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son - The Father, because He was conceived by the power of God, and the Son, because of the flesh, thus becoming the Father and Son, And They are one God, yea, the Very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth - And thus the flesh becoming subject to the Spirit, or the Son to the Father, being one God, suffereth temptation and yieldeth not to the temptation, But suffereth Himself to be mocked and scourged and cast out and disowned by His people. Alma 8 79-82, 104 RLDS (11:26-29 LDS) And Zeezrom saith unto him: "Thou sayest there is a true and a living God?" And Amulek saith: "Yea, there is a true and a living God." Now Zeezrom saith: "Is there more than one God?" And he answered: "No." And shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son and God the Father and the Holy Spirit, which is one Eternal God, To be judged according to their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil. Luke 10:23 Inspired Version (Joseph Smith Translation) All things are delivered to me of my Father; and no man knoweth that the Son is the Father, and the Father is the Son, but him to whom the Son will reveal it.

[@joesimpson9230]

@@aliunde The Book of Mormon confirms that God is a (singular) being...not multiple beings. Moroni 8:19 (8:18 LDS) For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable 👉Being, But He is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity. Mosiah 2:32 (4:19 LDS) For behold, are we not all beggers? Do we not all depend upon the same 👉being, even God, for all the substance which we have; for both food, and raiment, and for gold, and for silver, and for all the riches which we have of every kind? Alma 14:124 (26:35) Yea, and my joy is carried away, even unto boasting in my God; for he has all power, all wisdom, and all understanding; he comprehendeth all things, and he is 👉a merciful Being even unto salvation, to those who will repent and believe on his name. Mormon 4:81 (9:19 LDS) And if there were miracles wrought, then why has God ceased to be a God of miracles, and yet be 👉an unchangeable being. D&C 17:4b (D&C 20:19 LDS) after his own image and in his own likeness created he them, and gave unto them commandments that they should love and serve him the only living and true God, and that he should be the 👉only being whom they should worship.

[@debfryer2437]

Intellectualism puts spiritual growth on hold. It takes great humility to kneel and ask God, our eternal Father, if this work is His. Someday everyone will know.

[@melanieking1172]

One of the very first things that drew me to learn more about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints was how they treat others. President Gordon B. Hinkley taught “Let us pray for the forces of good. Let us reach out to help men and women of goodwill, whatever their religious persuasion and wherever they live. Let us stand firm against evil, both at home and abroad. … We can be an influence for good in this world, every one of us.”

[@heathwestover]

It is important to remember that the spiritual leaders of the Savior's time didn't have him killed because they didn't know the scriptures. Jesus Christ didn't match their interpretation of the scriptures. Make sure your interpretation of scripture doesn't blind you from seeing new, true, interpretations of scripture.

[@stephanieargyle7328]

Well said!! If they aren’t humbly seeking truth from God directly, then they will be closed off to the Spirit’s influence to reveal truth to them. Their misinterpretations of the Bible are stumbling blocks. Because of this the Bible has become their God instead of God Himself.

[@elizabethareja5470]

I don’t think he has any intention of accepting scripture unless it fits his belief

[@elkehoelzle7195]

You should invite Brother Jared Halverson from Unshaken for the podcast

[@TheeDawnJoye]

YES!!!!!

[@lizkt]

I love him. He was my professor back in the day

[@gingermcgovern5682]

Perfect person to have a great discussion with!

[@no-sloppaulson6641]

I have thought about this for a while now. This would be absolutely amazing!!

[@Stephanie-zm7kk]

Especially considering his educational background.

[@FlightParamedicRN]

52:36 if you really wanted to be respectful of Latter-day Saints you wouldn’t name your book “40 Questions About *Mormonism*” the Church has asked that you refer to it by its name: The Church of Jesus a Christ of Latter-day Saints. As an evangelical convert to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I appreciate the nuances of your conversation. I really think it would have been better to include a Latter-day Saint to your conversation.

[@scottvance74]

There's a history to the usage of the term "Mormon" or "mormonite". Contrary to popular belief, it was used primarily as a descriptive term and was not meant to be derogatory. At the time (1832-1833), the church was called the "church of christ" which was the same as the Cambellites and many other religions of the time. Prior to about 1900, in general conference when refering to themselves church leadership would use the term "Mormon" more than "latter-day saint". Just because Nelson has said that the term is offensive doesn't mean that people using it are trying to be offensive. "Member of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" is 14 sylables. "Mormon" is 2. That's why people use it. Sounds like you're "choosing to be offended". Bednar had some words on this topic.

[@FlightParamedicRN]

I understand all of that. And I’m not personally offended. I just feel that if the President and Prophet has asked us (the world) to use the proper name of the Church, that is how it should be addressed. “Mormon” wasn’t originally derogatory but it certainly had negative connotations now, especially in the evangelical sphere.

[@tracienielson7183]

@@scottvance74 We know the history. In the here and now, our Prophet asks that we be recognized by our official name. It is a truer representation of who we are and what we believe.

[@scottvance74]

@@tracienielson7183 I'm really glad that you know the history, because in my local interactions with members I have yet to meet someone who knows about the periods when mormonite was used, when general usage shifted to Mormon, and that the claim made by President Nelson that Mormon was origionally coined as a pejorative term is false. The current request is to either use the full official name or the shortened version, "member of the restored church of Jesus Christ". Imagine if you can how it might make a Catholic feel when you insist on using this title. Please explain how insisting that someone else call you a member of "the restored church of jesus christ" makes you more christian. In my world view, Mormons are christian when they act christian, not when they insist that people call them as such.

[@tracienielson7183]

@@scottvance74 There were also the Strangeites (a break off group), the Jaredites (BofM), Hamites (Bible).These are just 3 examples of the "ites". It was common in the past. It isn't important now. We need to follow the current counsel of the Prophet.

[@mamalougagon5259]

Eve and then Adam didn't mess anything up. They chose to fall, that man might live. They could not procreate in the garden. They had to learn, by falling, good and evil, joy and sorrow, etc. We are not punished for anyone's sins but our own, IF we don't truly repent. And if we DO repent, Christ has us covered through His Atonement.

[@princessadora]

by the sweat of the brow. we are punished for their sins.

[@Dandeeman26]

Again compliments to both pastors on the respectful tone.

[@samtate2011]

The gift of tongues in an LDS perspective is the ability to learn and understand languages. Pretty straight forward! Acts 2:4-6 "..because that every man heard them speak in his own language"

[@stephtimms1776]

As is done in the MTC with effort on our part.

[@timmiestabrnak]

Acts 2 isn’t talking about learning a language , it’s saying that as they spoke each person was able to understand in their own language.

[@DesertPrimrose]

​@@timmiestabrnakI'm LDS, but when I was in high school, I went with my friends to their Baptist and Assembly of God youth groups. I loved it...except the speaking in tongues part at the AOG church. The pastor had us all stand in a circle and he went around laying his hands on each of our heads and was speaking in tongues (gibberish). Adherents to that denomination might say I didn't understand, because I didn't have the spirit, but I spoke with my AOG friend about it later, and she told me she didn't buy into it, either. Additionally, I had previously been taught by my parents that if someone was speaking in tongues, there had to be at least one person present who could interpret what was being said, otherwise what is the point? When teenagers are studying in the MTC, we believe that their language learning abilities are enhanced because of the gift of tongues.

[@gtf5392]

@sariew8853 - I’m a non-LDS Christian and I just want to say that everything you said was spot on. I had the same experience when I attended an Assemblies of God church and that version of tongues seemed to diverge with what’s described in the Bible. So, I think you made an astute observation. I still view members of that denomination as brothers and sisters in Christ but I do feel they have a misunderstanding of the gift of tongues.

[@alisarichardsramirezmusic2233]

As a full-time missionary in Italy at 21, I prayed to have that gift so I could teach the people in Italy and moreover have the ability with my words to help them understand so the spirit could convert. The speed at which I learned it to have deep discussions and be fluent enough to convey doctrines, answer questions, present lessons, etc was nothing less than that promised gift at that time. At about 15 months into my mission, my Italian companion during a discussion, refused to speak as she said I was speaking perfect Italian for 30 minutes straight presenting the Plan of Salvation doctrine to our atheist investigator on the chalkboard and the spirit was very strong and she recognized the change in my ability to speak Italian clearly without error that she didnt want to interrupt. That was the only time I had perfect Italian I guess as I am not native. Our discussion led that atheist to no longer be atheist. To this day I have a personal understanding of the gift that is for a purpose that brings understanding when needed.

[@gyoungberg]

And the unofficial Latter Day Saint 14th Article of Faith... "We believe in meetings-all that have been held, all that are now scheduled-and we believe there will yet be held many great and important meetings. We have endured many meetings and hope to be able to endure all meetings. If there is a meeting, we seek after it."

[@oceancoast92657]

LOL🤣🤣🤣

[@sparkssentinel7056]

😂😂😂

[@DeliverQuality]

I take it you don’t like meetings lol

[@natedawg2020]

Haha this made me laugh out loud

[@stephtimms1776]

They've actually been trying to reduce our meetings.

[@Croaven]

I'm confused by this video. I don't see what the intent would be if the intent of your channel is lesring all you can about our beliefs. This looks more like Apologia Studios light. Why would you discuss the articles of faith without someone present that understands and believes them? You didn't even explain most of them correctly. That would be like me discussing the apostolic creed with another latter day saint who has only the most rudimentary understanding of it's deeper meaning. There is also a heavy focus on forcing differences in beliefs rather than showing similarities. Division vs unity. This seems like an odd choice and closer to the Apologia way of doing things.

[@godsoffspring4195]

It's easier to talk about them than it is to them. :>)

[@mycatwould]

Hoping Greg from CWIC does a follow-up to this.

[@spencerdunwoody5508]

Are you saying reading the articles of faith is not a good way to learn about the church?

[@kristinrichmond8185]

reading without understanding, is just reading words.

[@natedawg2020]

How did he not explain most of them correctly?

[@Vetionarian]

(LDS perspective here) Great conversation! It's ok to discuss our differences and I am learning to become less uncomfortable with the idea of fellowshipping with other Christian believers without holding judgements toward them. I did have some awful experiences with Evangelicals as a LDS missionary but I also had very kind experiences. I know for a fact that some Latter-Day Saints also use hostile language when conversing with Evangelicals and your channel stands as a testament that it doesn't ever have to be enmity between us. Charity never faileth.

[@kjcdb8er]

Article 8: If God speaks today, then it is patently clear that it is possible that new revelation is possible, for example by correcting traditional interpretations of bible passages. By prescribing hard bounds on what may be considered fixed, belief in sola scriptura is still presuming to place bounds on what God may or may not do.

[@spencercardon]

Protestants often exaggerate how historically accurate the Bible is, particularly the Old Testament. Scholars have found numerous problems with how the text has been transmitted over time, including the New Testament. On the other hand, Mormons have a stronger footing here because they are open to corrections and don't insist on the Bible being completely without error. This flexibility allows for God's purposes to unfold without dogmatism.

[@BrianTerrill]

That is true and exactly what many of the Jewish leaders were doing. The Sadducees were Sola Torah but that wasn't the correct teaching.

[@Elizabeth-rk3do]

@BrianTerrill The Sadducees didn't believe in a resurrection. That's not 'Sola Torah.' 🙂 Even pagans believed in a resurrection. (I Corinthians 15) That's why they baptized for the dead. Several pagan religions today still baptize for the dead. The Egyptians had their pyramids. Qin Shi Huang had about 70,000 people buried alive to help him out in the next life. Everyone knows that they will be resurrected and face God. You don't need a Bible for that. God has placed eternity in our hearts. ✨️

[@BrianTerrill]

@@Elizabeth-rk3do well nice try with that fabricated interpretation of 1 Corinthians 15:29, like Paul would refer to a pagan practice to justify the argument of the resurrection. And yes, Sadducees were "solo Torah" they claimed to not believe anything but the five books of Moses.

[@lawrenceherrel6370]

they only believe it is "revelation" if it agrees with their point of view! Otherwise it is of the devil.

[@jayhoard9071]

Dear Pastor Jeff. I have been waiting so patiently for your response to my simple question : Who do you think wrote the Book of Mormon ? Something for your audience to ponder : It took J.R Tolkien 2 1/2 years to write the 300 pages of the Hobbit or approximately 134 words per day. It took him 15 years to write the Lord of the Rings at 112 words per day. J. R. Rowling wrote Harry Potter, and the philophers stone at approximately 293 words per day. Stephen King wrote the Stand at a half a million words in 647 words per day. Young, uneducated Joseph wrote or translated ( depending on your point of view ), the 779 pages of the Book of Mormon in 65 days, or 4100 words per day. Not too bad for a beginner ? What do you think ?

[@jayhoard9071]

I can see that you are very well versed in what the BOM isn't. I assume that you have read it at least once with real intent and a sincere heart.

[@mmelhsals7389]

It's with the Authority, Gifts and Power of God...

[@karenperry8976]

I used to believe Pastor Jeff when he said he wanted to "learn." I am coming to understand that is not the only purpose of his exploration of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I am learning that his earnest intention and interests are not in gaining understanding but rather to critique and poke holes in the beliefs of the Latter-day Saints. My testimony and belief in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not based on the document in your hands. It is not based on the teaching and sophistry of elegant, educated preachers. I am a sinner and have found peace in the life and message of my Lord, Jesus Christ. He died that we all might live in love and peace. We all need to stop throwing stones of discord at each other!

[@saralyg]

How was this throwing stones? Honest question …

[@philhoover717]

A faith that cannot be scrutinized cannot be trusted.

[@daffodilfleur]

@@philhoover717I’ve not heard Jeff scrutinize his own faith, but I have heard him state why his faith is correct.

[@TheWrath2010]

I have to laugh at how many of you saints will sit and listen to the teardown of your religion. Yes, he does it in the kindest way lol.

[@daffodilfleur]

@@TheWrath2010 By listening to Jeff I’ve learned much more about how to compare and contrast our religious beliefs, which is something I’ve never been able to wrap my head around before. As President Nelson stated at our last Gen. Conference, we have priesthood keys. We also have temples where we do the work of sealing the generations that’ve come before. So, I know what we have, and I know Jeff chooses to not have that. He can be part of this great work, or not. It’s his decision, but I know I love the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and this is where I’ll be. I know the beautiful truths that I have and can clearly see what he has. Why would I ever give up what I have for that? I know this church and this gospel is true; I love it. Jesus Christ is at the head and we’ll keep loving Him and following Him, despite what arrows are thrown our way. If we let it, those arrows just make us stronger.

[@MRxMADHATTER]

You need to go over all of this again with an LDS authority. You missed a bunch of things and came away with some incorrect understanding. For example: In number 5. We believe that the priesthood is not something aquired through study or approval by the church. It's like a physical thing that can only be recieved from someone who already has it. I was given the priesthood by my father, who recieved it from someone else, who recieved it from someone else. and so on all the way back to Joseph Smith who recieved it from God...in person. I have recieved my priesthood through a traceable chain all the way back from God himself. Joseph Smith recieved the keys to restore the church from God himself. Every single one of these articles is completely different from the beliefs of every other denomination on earth. God's house is a house of order. You will find the exact same doctrine taught no matter which ward, branch, stake, or district in the church you go. I have seen Catholic churches that don't teach the same thing. I have seen members jump from one congragation to another because a pastor preaches something different from a fellow pastor of the same faith. These articles are like the ten commandments written in stone, never changing, unless done so by a Prophet who was told to by God himself. No other church on earth teaches this.

[@Elizabeth-rk3do]

In the New Testament, God gave all believers the priesthood. Men, women, children, and even black people have had the priesthood for 2,000 years now. It is not a position in a church. It is who we are in Christ. I Peter 2:5, 9; Revelation 1:6; 5:10; The true and living God would've never banned black people from the priesthood until 1978. 😢 God has personally anointed me. I John 2:27 God has sealed me with his Holy Spirit. Ephesians 1:13-14 🕊

[@natedawg2020]

I think Jeff has demonstrated that he understands the concept of uninterrupted Priesthood lineage by laying on of hands in other videos. He just disagrees with it because he believes in universal priesthood. In this video, I thought Jeff was gracious in conceding he respects the organization of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I agree that to our perspective, universal priesthood defies a house of order and that is a fine argument. However, you shouldn’t be convinced any church has true priesthood simply because that church has the semblance of an organized hierarchy with positions and titles used in the New Testament. I agree it helps, but let’s not oversimplify what convinces people of truth.

[@kjeracarroll450]

Agreed

[@BGCflyer]

@@natedawg2020 ...ok I can agree with that. Well said!

[@zionmama150]

Yeah this need a react video from Greg from CWIC or something. It is so hard to explain all the doctrine.

[@stevencraven4897]

The statement that "Adam messed up" IS THE POINT of disconnect. Adam fell that man might be..... A core element of LDS theology. Father Adam and Mother Eve and their fall was necessary for the rest of mankind to become.

[@BGCflyer]

...and this is a great point to bring up. It's a huge divergence from what we read in the Bible vs. Book of Mormon. Can we be honest that there are differences here? Why would Adam "be required" to disobey God? if God is God from All eternity. If God is all knowing and omnipotent, why would God the Father, require His creation to disobey or to sin?

[@natedawg2020]

@@BGCflyer We agree there are huge differences, and they are complex. It has to with our understanding of agency and deification. God importantly did not command Adam to sin, but he allowed Adam a situation where he could fall yet be redeemed and deified. We believe that developing agency is an essential part of probation and progression unto deification. If man was not separated from God, perhaps the environment would not require true free will and agency to choose between right and wrong. Since sin cannot exist the presence of God, yet he wants us to be in a situation where we can develop our free will and agency, we have a plan for probation that even involves God allowing us to choose to leave. We believe Lucifer and a third of the premortal spirit children had a degree of agency that allowed them to rebel and be cast out outside the confines of a plan of redemption. We would call this sin. We believe Adam’s transgression was within the confines of a structured and foreordained plan for redemption.

[@Crikey420]

⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠@@BGCflyerbecause you will never know true joy until you yourself have made the choice to choose good over evil. We have agency, and so it is necessary that we be tempted. Adams fall gave himself and all of humanity the opportunity to choose good over evil, that we may make the choice for ourselves, will we follow God and overcome our fallen state, or give in to the enticings of the adversary. So yes, in other words God knew we would sin, all of us even Adam. If he hadn’t had the chance to disobey he wouldn’t have had the chance to obey in the first place. That is not agency. We know God knew we would all make mistakes, even Adam, because he sent His Son Jesus Christ to save us all. We have a saviour for a reason, and we had Him before we ever came to this earth. Does that not speak to Gods omnipotency, that He knew us and what we would do, and provided a way to be saved from this fallen mortal state? A better question you should have asked was why is it required that we all choose between good and evil? That answer is found in both books. I get where you are coming from but you brought up a point that is very easily addressed and understood.

[@UtahKent]

An omniscient God planted the garden with the intent for his creatures (us) to eternally live there in communion with him...but...with a tree that would cause its partakers to be cast out, after being convinced by one of his other creatures to partake and defy God.... and He, the omniscient God, didn't see it coming. Ooooookay?

[@natedawg2020]

@@UtahKent The correct understanding of our belief is that God did not intend Adam and Eve to stay in the garden eternally, and that he did see it coming. In case people missed the sarcasm.

[@JesseBardsley]

One thing about the "plain and precious truths" taken away from the Bible that the Book of Mormon mentions: This can also mean letters from Peter, Paul, or other apostles that could have been added to the current canon, but which were not. There is a parallel to this in Joseph Smith's story of losing the 116 pages of the Book of Mormon manuscript: Satan is always seeking to take away light and truth, in this case other teachings of the early apostles that would have clarified things further. Thus, this taking away does not have to include the removal or changing of verses from the letters of Paul that we do have, or from the gospels that we have now.

[@Elizabeth-rk3do]

There are actually many books that were not included in the Canon of Scripture. (53?) The books not included were historically inaccurate and/or contradicted the books written by the apostles. If there were new books, they would have to agree with what we already have.

[@BGCflyer]

...you said, "This can also mean letters from Peter, Paul, or other apostles that could have been added to the current canon, but which were not". What? is there evidence of additional letters from Peter or Paul (ie. manuscripts) from them that were not included? Please show your reference to this comment. Thanks!

[@NoelFallstrom]

I agree with this. However, my framework or pair of glasses I am using to look at this stems from the fact that we have a lot of truths today that we believe also existed at the time of the early apostles. One reason why we have so many sources of the current canonized works is that they were widely distributed and copied for a public audience. Some truths, such as temple ordinances including baptisms for the dead would not have been widely distributed. They would have been kept by the apostles and the temple workers. Even temple attendance wouldn't have been included in letters to saints that did not live near a temple. For an evangelical audience that does not look at it with the same framework, I'd present it like this: If we excluded one of Paul's letters from the New Testament, we would be missing some teachings that have become core scriptures in our understanding of doctrine. Does anyone believe that the letters from Paul that are included in the New Testament comprise 100% of Paul's sermons? If we had another that was verified, it would invariably be centered on yet another doctrinal topic and we would have more truths that were available in the early church and have since been lost. All truth and revelation should be measured by what was said before. A Christian reads the New Testament and feels that it aligns perfectly with the Old Testament. Ask a Jew and they will believe there are too many fundamental changes. Talking to a Latter-day Saint is similar to that. We still use the old and new testaments as measuring sticks for truth, but we view the Book of Mormon and Latter-day prophets as essential pieces to prove the truthfulness of the Bible which prophesied about our day.

[@BrianTerrill]

@@BGCflyer yes there is evidence that Paul wrote other epistles: An epistle to the Corinthians that predates 1 Corinthians: "9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:" (1 Corinthians 5:9) The Epistle of Paul to the Laodicians: "16 And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea." (Colosians 4:16)

[@ricardoalarcon4200]

@@BGCflyerI don't know about manuscripts, but i know these: "Those inspired and, one might truly say, divine men, by which I mean the Apostles of Christ, having purified their lives to the highest degree and adorned their minds with every virtue, spoke only the common tongue; but they were emboldened by the possession of a supernatural power, which had been bestowed upon them as a gift by the Savior himself. They neither knew nor made any effort to know anything about the art of persuasion or skill with words as taught in the schools. The only power they ever made use of was the assurance of the Holy Ghost and the miraculous power of Christ operating through them, by which they preached the kingdom of God throughout the world. They gave little thought to writing anything down. What they did they did with the aid of a power beyond that of men. Paul, for example, the most skillful speaker and the best educated man of them all, left nothing in writing but a few extremely short letters; yet he was in a position to utter marvelous things without number, as one having actually been in contact with visions of the third heaven, caught up even to God's paradise, where he was deemed worthy to hear unutterable things. But the other disciples of our Savior were not without experience of these things, either: the twelve Apostles, the Seventy disciples, and countless others under their instruction.” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History III, 24 .

[@nalytafikarilalaramananaiv4247]

Well, I can tell you what speaking in tongue means because I experienced it myself. I was called to serve as a full time missionary in Kenya between 2011 to 2013, not able to speak English. I spent three weeks in an MTC in Johannesburg SA. Within those three weeks I was ready to preach in the language that I was assigned to which is English. I know many young men out there preaching the gospel and experiencing the same thing. We don't believe that when people are speaking in tongue, they speak some unknow language that the audience cannot understand. Just like in the Bible, they would speak other languages than their own so that the people they are preaching can understand them.

[@Mounty621]

Jeff, I would think regarding your comment about an "updated" version of "The Articles of Faith," you could consider the Proclamation of the Living Jesus Christ, The Family Proclamation, and the Restoration Proclamation would be furtherance to that.

[@cindymacferran331]

Great point. His comment seemed like a negative dig vs a genuine question.

[@richardbennettiii7182]

I personally like this one. Yes i do appreciate when you have the LDS perspective. However, i think both you and your guess were more educated than most outside the church on this subject. Yes, i see you punching holes on things that dont make sense from your perspective but it is good for us to see how other people look at things sometimes we take for granted how great is to have all this extra escripture, that to me is a blessing. Seeing your perspective personally helps me to understand how people looking into our believes feel or see them. I think you were respectful and some people are very precious about you pushing your point of view, i just think another perspective is healthy at least once in a while. It is interesting to see what jumps at you guys.

[@DKWalser]

We want the Bible to be translated correctly, and we are thrilled that modern scholarship is documenting its remarkable accuracy. However, modern scholarship has also documented that several of the epistles attributed to Paul were written by someone else years after Paul's death. Scholarship also demonstrates that parts of the four gospels were added years after they were written. The list of inaccuracies in the translations of the Bible currently available is long. I think modern scholarship supports, rather than undermines, Joseph Smith's caution to only believe the Bible to the extent it was translated correctly.

[@brainhunter1000]

I’m curious where you come across articles like this. Would like to inform myself as an active member. I certainly don’t discount this to be true. Many letters in the Bible have uncertain scholarship, but I don’t know where to look

[@DKWalser]

@@brainhunter1000 A search for "Authorship of the Pauline epistles" will bring up a link to a Wikipedia article that provides a good summary of the topic. The article provides citations to several scholarly works on both sides of the debate. In sum, of the 13 books in the New Testament attributed to Paul, seven are accepted by scholars as written by him; Paul's authorship of three is a question of serious debate among scholars; and three are thought by virtually all scholars to be authored by someone else. None of this means the epistles that may not have been written by Paul should not be considered scripture. Obviously, God could have inspired an anonymous author to write the epistles, they were subsequently misattributed to Paul.

[@bluedreams517]

​@@brainhunter1000there's several sources you can look at to get a scholarly overview. I went on a scholarly binge a couple years ago, when my bro converted to a conservative non-denominational Christian group. I preferred ones that didn't have a background similar to me (LDS)and that weren't into Christian apologetics, but focuses more on scholarship. I also chose things I could do via audible as I struggle to read non-fiction. I really liked James l kugel's "how to read the bible." It is LONG, but it went thoroughly through the Hebrew bible/OT and broke down scholarly and common Christian/Jewish interpretations of said passages. He is both a scholar and a practicing jew. I also liked a couple of Bart ehrman's stuff. He was an evangelical, then liberal Christian, now agnostic. Also a solid scholar. I did one of his courses called "the New testament" on audible that goes over the basics of modern scholarship on the NT.

[@DKWalser]

@@brainhunter1000 Search for "Authorship of the Pauline epistles" and you'll be given a link to a Wikipedia article that does a good job of summarizing the scholarship. The article cites a long list of scholarly works discussing aspects of the debate. Bottom line: Of the 13 New Testament books attributed to Paul (14 if you count Hebrews), seven are widely accepted as having been written by Paul; the authorship of three is the subject of debate; and most scholars agree three were not written by Paul. (Virtually no one believes Paul wrote Hebrews.) Similar disputes exist about other books, and portions of books, in the Bible. For example, few scholars believe the Apostle John wrote the gospel attributed to him. Nor do they believe he wrote the epistles. Many doubt he wrote Revelations. (The Book of Mormon attests that John was the author of Revelations. Maybe Pastor Jeff should cite the Book of Mormon in support for the authenticity of Revelations?) None of this means the disputed works should not be considered scripture. God could have inspired whomever wrote them.

[@Civil_Maniac]

In the end any errors in the Bible probably came before catholism solidified into a cohesive unit and it’s a miracle we have any stories from the time of Christ. the Old Testament is a mess unto itself and several sections are definitely non-inspired works

[@Rippinsteo2926]

Thank you for this respectful discussion. Those are always enlightening. I do agree with others that it would have been nice to have an educated, faithful LDS input on the discussion because you did tend to miss here and there contextual nuance that better captures the meaning of the text of the Articles of Faith. Thank you for being open to meaningful interfaith exchanges! ❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@KevinReeve]

I agree that the Articles of Faith were written as a 30k foot level for a general audience, who at the time had many rumors, misconceptions, and lies about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. They are core believes.

[@dustiwnl1480]

Hey I'm a member of the church and I love what you've been doing with your channel. I've been watching a kind of similar channel like yours called 52 churches in 52 weeks. He was raised a protestant but decided to go explore many Christian churches and document his journey. But something stood out to him with the LDS church. He has been "investigating" it for over a year now and today he announced he got baptized. I really think you would find his story interesting.

[@sharongambardella-yt7eh]

I get that pastor Jeff is finding out more about the LDS church.. but why is he having a discussion about OUR beliefs without an LDS member there. This is t asking more, it’s dissecting our beliefs.

[@kevins4254]

If you look carefully, you'll find a lot of LDS KZbin channels that talk about Evangelical and Catholic beliefs without Evangelical or Catholic members present. Does that bother you, too?

[@sharongambardella-yt7eh]

@@kevins4254 Not at all, I was just curious about him talking about their interpretation when I thought hello saints was about just asking members what they believed.

[@Compulsive-Elk7103]

I’ll second the other commenter when he mentioned that plenty of lds channels will talk about Catholic and Protestant beliefs without members of those faiths there. If you want non lds to have an lds present when talking about lds belief , then the same should go when lds are talking about mainstream Christianity

[@jessea2871]

@@crazyaboutcards what is the actual goal? To create an off ramp for LDS members to leave the church?

[@valeriehallmark6467]

@@jessea2871 I’ve been suspecting that for awhile now. Why hasn’t Pastor Jeff moved on to other faiths? Say for instance the Jehovah Witnesses. There has to come a time when he’s learned all there is to learn about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

[@kevinhardy5988]

I've been waiting for the next Book of Mormon video for a while - hope it'll be out soon. I appreciate the content you make

[@DJBattlewax]

I share the same concern that had already been stated here: there are very few ways to tear down trust than getting two people from another religion to dissect and discuss principles and canon of our faith. Cutting us out of this discussion would be one thing of you were exploring on your own, but including another pastor just makes it look like you're teaming up against us--per the usual that we're accustomed to.

[@DeliverQuality]

Jeff does try to keep things equal, so i believe this was the intent

[@DJBattlewax]

@@DeliverQuality it doesn't really come across that way. I will still cautiously enjoy the channel, but things like this keep chipping away the trust and hope that I have for fairness.

[@GrandmaKnightLife]

And yet the LDS team up against us by sending 2 young men (and sometimes a woman too) to visit one woman!

[@DJBattlewax]

@@GrandmaKnightLife there's a difference between proselyting and what's taking place here. Please be intellectually honest and show good faith. You're talking about something entirely different.

[@GrandmaKnightLife]

@@DJBattlewax I really don’t see what you’re reacting to about this.

[@Austionous]

Hi Jeff, I'm a long time viewer of your content. I love your channel and your mission. This video could definitely use a a follow up. A lot was missed here that would be good to cover in the future. Thanks for all you do

[@mmkvoe6342]

How I'm seeing this video, the articles of faith are very straightforward, really, and can be studied based on how they stand as written, face value, and so it's not like we necessarily "needed another person to represent The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" in this video, as the representative this time is the articles of faith themselves, and then the guest and host are able to be representing their faith alongside or in contrast. Definitely in any given time slot, there's not a ton that can be covered, but I think this is a fair setup.

[@Austionous]

@@mmkvoe6342 Yeah I totally get that. And I think this video has value. That's why I think a follow up would be a good future video. It also just goes to show how much simple and clear language is still affected by cultural foundations and paradigms.

[@stevencraven4897]

In fact, the American experiment seems to have been necessary to lay the groundwork to enable the Restoration through Joseph Smith.

[@Tennislover-t5v]

I am a member! I loved this discussion. I thought it was very academic and respectful!

[@mmkvoe6342]

One thing to notice is that each belief that President Joseph Smith explained in the next article/s of faith builds on the previous beliefs expressed in the previous article/s. So when you come to article of faith 2 that mentions Adam's transgression versus our own, that understanding of doctrine is needed in order to then understand the statements in articles of faith 3 and 4, etc. about why we believe that we need a Savior and to be saved, and why there are principles ordinances of a gospel, etc.

[@carolymbramwell9446]

As i read through these diversified and passionate comments back and forth it seems clear the vital need for the First Vision and subsequent revelations to restablish who God is, who We are, and what The Plan of Salvation really looks like.

[@carolymbramwell9446]

What's really clear! The Father loves ALL of his offspring (male female bond or free). Does it make any sense for Him to be the author of such confusion/divided against Himself by inspiring such establishments of diversity of doctrines? He told Peter that His church would be built upon the rock of revelation (not Peter) otherwise the gates of hell would prevail against it, which has proven obvious. Unless we have a church operating with the same power, authority, and continued revelation like the New Testament church what we will always have is what we see expressed here; the sincere philosophies of men mingled with scripture. And we should know who the author of that is. (Matt 16:13-19)

[@joesimpson9230]

And when referring to the First Vision, refer to the 1832 account which was the only one actually written by Joseph Smith. Sad that it was hidden for decades.

[@bobrussell8339]

@@joesimpson9230 I don't know where you get this nonsense that Joseph Smith only wrote the 1832 account, but it isn't true.

[@joesimpson9230]

@@bobrussell8339 It is true. 1832 account was only one actually written by Joseph Smith. It was torn from it's journal and hidden in the safe of polygamist Joseph Fielding Smith for decades while that denomination taught plurality of Gods. But there is only one God and Jesus Christ is God. Jesus Christ is the Father. Mosiah 15:1-5 And now Abinadi saith unto them: "I would that ye should understand that God Himself shall come down among the children of men and shall redeem His people; And because He dwelleth in flesh, He shall be called the Son of God; And having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son - The Father, because He was conceived by the power of God, and the Son, because of the flesh, thus becoming the Father and Son, And They are one God, yea, the Very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth - And thus the flesh becoming subject to the Spirit, or the Son to the Father, being one God, suffereth temptation and yieldeth not to the temptation, But suffereth Himself to be mocked and scourged and cast out and disowned by His people. Alma 11:26-29 And Zeezrom saith unto him: "Thou sayest there is a true and a living God?" And Amulek saith: "Yea, there is a true and a living God." Now Zeezrom saith: "Is there more than one God?" And he answered: "No." Ether 4:12 For behold, I Am the Father; I Am the light and the life and the truth of the world. Luke 10:23 Inspired Version (Joseph Smith Translation) All things are delivered to me of my Father; and no man knoweth that the Son is the Father, and the Father is the Son, but him to whom the Son will reveal it.

[@ann-mobilewilliams1819]

I grew up in Denmark and the Danish bible is translated from the German bible. Then I moved to Canada, and started using the King James English bible, which have a different translation path from the German bible. I found a few things where my Danish bible was polar opposite to the King James version. I got a brochure from the Danish Bible Company, where they themselves showed that errors had crept into the bible. I have also had to translate back and forth between Danish and English and found out how hard it is to translate the words without loosing the meaning. Also I have seen the change in the Danish language since I left, and the meanings of some words have totally changed.

[@catalinaleavitt5798]

Even reading the King James against a modern translation, which I have done, you lose a lot in translation…(I’m a foreign language teacher and you do lose some meaning in translation)I know for a fact…!

[@Kindnessmatters2]

It would be fun to see you go through the Joseph Smith translations of the bible in the footnotes!

[@netherquartz8946]

8:37 When is "Credal Christianity" going to admit that they are following man made philosophies and not what God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ taught? I know the answer is never. It just bothers me how close minded "Credal Christians" are and even looking at the history of Christianity it is a very valid viewpoint that the Trinity evolved at a later date not when Christ and his apostles were on the earth.

[@kevins4254]

Shall I give you a list of LDS concepts that didn't exist when Christ and His apostles were on earth?? It's a very long list.

[@netherquartz8946]

​@@kevins4254 You could try but it would be impossible for anyone to prove it. The thing is it goes both ways. One could say Jesus taught X Y Z and it just wasnt documented and was lost to history. On the other hand you could say Jesus didn't teach X Y Z as we have no record of it. You could just pray and ask God with a sincere heart and he will give you an answer. Its just for some people disagree even when you do that. He well tell us when He returns.

[@peaceful525]

Wow. A Mormon talking about " man made philosophies." That's rich.

[@netherquartz8946]

@@peaceful525 Rich with the Holy Spirit! Wait, does that make any sense 🤔 haha And how do you know I'm a member of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints? A Jehovah's Witness could say the same thing. I've actually met many protestants who also agree the whole Trinity concept is questionable too.

[@ricardoalarcon4200]

Sola Scriptura is anti-biblical . You don't need to believe in LDS church to think this way, you just need to believe in Revelation 14:6 " Then I saw another angel flying in the midst of heaven, and he had the eternal gospel to proclaim to those who live on the earth-to every nation, tribe, language and people." . The stick of Ephraim needs to be joined to Judah’s stick (the Bible) Ezekiel 37:19. The Book of Mormon is only part of these prophecy. Universal priesthood is one of the weakest point of protestantism . If the Catolic church was corupted then nobody in the world had the authoroty to conduct the Church of Christ. Luther did not solve this problem and was not called by God.

[@alisarichardsramirezmusic2233]

Creedal Christianity (not even Biblical) may have good intentions and preserved Christ and His teachings through middle ages but is where that Apostacy flourishes to this day and creates a stumbling block for many to see the need for the Restored church of Jesus Christ and accept it.

[@charlottegardenhire6408]

I think a video on the gathering of Israel would be beneficial and enlightening. 😊

[@damionhunter314]

I was just thinking that the more the Bible translation scholarship is born out, the more the 8th 35:12 Article of Faith comes true. Latter Day Saints WANT the Bible to be translated correctly.

[@joesimpson9230]

There are significant differences in Bible translations, as mentioned, and there are also different canons. The early Ethiopian Bible has 89 books in it, and the Catholic Bible has 73, and the Orthodox Bible has 81. Which is correct? Who gets to determine what is and isn’t words of God? Plain and precious things removed. I absolutely agree that God cannot contradict Himself and so the 66 books can be used as a rule and measuring rod for other texts…by which it is found that the Book of Mormon is in complete agreement in doctrines since it is also scripture. Jesus Christ was sent to all the house of Israel, not just the 2 tribes in Judea. Other sheep of His heard His voice and one account of that is in the Book of Mormon.

[@kjcdb8er]

Article 1: Comparing the teachings of the LDS Godhead vs. the historical creedal Trinity is a clear and unambiguous way to evaluate whether LDS are right about a general apostasy.

[@mandysorensen9412]

As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I very much appreciated the intent of this dialogue and the respectful approach taken. It is clear you both have taken a lot of time and study to bring an informed conversation to this subject…. However not having a member of the Church also in attendance was a big miss on some very important concepts that would be key in understanding context-especially when discussing original sin, the gathering of the 12 tribes of Israel or in other words Jacobs biological 12 sons lineage and why the symbolism of the locations of where/when Christ will appear at the second coming DOES have significance as well as Priesthood authority given to members of the Church being directly traced back through laying on of hands to Jesus Christ himself. There were a couple other things as I listened that I wished an LDS commentator could have clarified doctrinal points on that would have been helpful to this dive into the 13 articles of Faith, but hopefully you will have a follow up discussion with a Latter Day Saint who had a chance to listen to this episode 😊. God Bless in your work of building bridges in the Christian Faith community 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

[@mandysorensen9412]

….and I would also love to add that although there were a few errors of representing LDS perspective, I really enjoyed hearing your perspective on what you understood about the Articles of Faith 😊

[@NataliHutcheson]

The tribes referred to in the 10th article of faith are referring to the 12 Tribes of Israel, tracing back to Abraham and his 12 sons. Not the Nephites and the Lamanites. We believe that 10 of the tribes are lost

[@BrianTerrill]

Jesus is clearly not the same being as God the Father, we know that because he asked his apostles "but whom say ye that I am" (Matthew 16:15) Peter responded: "16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." (Matthew 16:16) The term "i am" is a personal state of being. If Christ shared the same "being" as the Father Peter's answer should have been "you are God"

[@lindsayrager37]

Gift of tongues: I served a mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Hong Kong 🇭🇰 and I absolutely experienced this gift. I feel the Spirit of God every time I speak in Cantonese or hear Cantonese.

[@kjeracarroll450]

To help understand the articles of faith I would suggest reading Elder James E. Talamage’s booked entitled, The Articles of Faith. Also to understand our views of Jesus Christ, you can also look at another book of his called, Jesus The Christ.

[@angieavp317]

I appreciate each one of your podcasts because they strengthen my testimony that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true. Keep learning with an open mind, and listen to the Spirit to receive a similar confirmation.

[@emergence2000]

This was really helpful. I have been studying with two young missionaries in order to learn more about the LDS faith and last time they were over they read the Articles of Faith to me. The young men didn't understand my questions and I was left thinking the Articles were shallow and divisive. Your understanding of protestantism and ability to compare and contrast viewpoints really makes the Articles make sense. I hope more LDS members watch your channel so they can understand where people's questions come from and then can really have meaningful conversations. Thanks for all your good work!!

[@lizkt]

Thank you for this comment. That is why having respectful interfaith discussions are so important. Otherwise, we can never understand fully the other person's viewpoint. Without that, questions and concerns are hard to address and misunderstandings can happen. For example, I never understood why protestants got so upset over us having the book of Mormon. Then I learned how strictly they believe the Bible is the only source of truth and so us having more Scripture can be seen as a challenge to their belief system. Now I can be more patient and understanding with them because I understand where they are coming from.

[@Elizabeth-rk3do]

​@lizkt With all due respect, I had read the entire King James Version of the Bible over 30 times before I knew anything about LDS teachings. When reading the Book of Mormon, I knew right away that it contradicted the Bible and the teachings of Jesus Christ. Even I Nephi 1 is historically and linguistically inaccurate. So right there we are at an impasse.

[@LuxuryPads90]

​@@Elizabeth-rk3do may I ask which teachings of Jesus Christ it contradicts?

[@Elizabeth-rk3do]

​@LuxuryPads90 Ephesians 2:8-9 says that we are saved by grace through faith, not of works. 2 Nephi 25:23 says that we are saved by grace after all we can do. Moroni 10:32 We must deny ourselves of all ungodliness, then is grace sufficient.

[@Elizabeth-rk3do]

​@@LuxuryPads90 According to the Bible, God commanded that only one temple was to be built. It must be in Jerusalem. There was only one high priest at a time. According to the Book of Mormon, there were multiple temples and multiple high priests. This violates God's command. ***** According to the Bible, it took over 183,000 men seven years to build Solomon's temple. According to the Book of Mormon, a few men built a replica of Solomon's temple soon after they arrived. ***** According to the Book of Mormon, God cursed people with dark skin. Dark skin can turn white. In the Bible, God never cursed anyone with dark skin. Dark skin can not turn white.

[@CM-ek1bf]

Jeff, you agree with the first Article of Faith. You believe in God, in Jesus Christ, and in The Holy Ghost. But you understand those words according to the philosophies of men proposed in the Council of Nicaea convened, long after the apostolic times by the emperor, Constantine in 325 AD. The philosophy of “the trinity” is not taught in the Bible. Knowledge of the true nature of God is the fundamental truth that was lost in the apostacy and restored to Joseph in his first vision. Everything else that you can’t accept follows naturally from an understanding of the true nature of God. My grandmother used to say, “It wasn’t what I didn’t know that fouled me up. It’s what I knew that wasn’t true.” That's true for you. What you know that isn't so (the philosophy of the trinity), is confusing you. Acting upon what he knew, Saul persecuted the Christians. What he knew that wasn’t true fouled him up. On the road to Damascus, Saul recognized his mistake, when he asked, “Who art thou, Lord?” When Saul recognized Jesus as Lord, he became Paul, the great Apostle. You could do as others have done. Ask God to reveal His true nature to you through personal revelation. When you learn His true nature, it will fundamentally rock your world. You will be delighted and amazed.

[@brainhunter1000]

#10 was pretty far off. This is really focusing on two things: missionary work. Nephites and Lamanites are included, but they are one tribe-Manassa. We mean all 10 lost tribes. And government. The new Jerusalem will be a government type location where the spiritual matters will be handled. Judgements, and revelations, corrections, and anything else Christ seeks to share. But Jerusalem will still be a major gather point and governmental center as well according to what I have learned. As for a fourteenth, I’d say we do have them but they are now called among other things, proclamations. Such as the proclamation on the family.

[@thays9999]

This was outstanding, still very respectful. I love how the 2 of you bounce off of each to respectfully discuss both our faith in Christ, where it aligns and where it is different. Bring him back, regularly!

[@BGCflyer]

@@jesselenz5452 ...ok, I agree with you. Where was Pastor Jeff wrong about the LDS view? LDS use more than just the Bible, so it would make sense that there would be some divergence, if we are being honest here.

[@BrianTerrill]

​@@BGCflyerprotestants use more than just the Bible but in their minds those things they use explain the Bible. They don't have the same authority as scripture but according to Apologia church and many other Evangelical churches we lds are damned to hell and denied the grace of Christ till we agree with them.

[@jlewis8145]

@@BrianTerrill You don't need to agree with Christians. You do need to agree with Jesus Christ.

[@oceancoast92657]

8th Article of faith.. Kyle was correct in that "Translated" really was broader inclusive of Transmission as well. However, respectfully, Jeff, we don't have the rich manuscript attestation that you assert. Most (99%) of the NT manuscripts are from the 5th century onward. We have ZERO manuscripts from the 1st century. Fragments in the 2nd.. some complete books in the 3rd and it's not until the 4th to 5th centuries that we have full manuscripts... and most of the alleged 5000+ manuscripts that evangelicals often tout.. are well beyond the 5th century. Which then brings up a critical point.. just because we have a lot of manuscripts of something. doesn't make it correct.. Just POPULAR. And thus the large majority of NT manuscripts the exist were simply the POPULAR ones, not necessarily what was originally written or spoken, thus the translation/transmission problem. Bruce Metzger famously or perhaps infamously made the assertion that we can be confident the text we have we have 98% original.. The infamous nature of his comment is that most people misunderstood what he meant by "original'.. they assumed it to refer to the original autographs , but not so- it was the original "source" of existing material.. Such original "Source" may itself be centuries removed from the original Autographs, and in some cases there may not have been an original autograph. So it then becomes a matter of "Faith" that the Bible text we have today, is what was originally revealed by God through his apostles.. But there is NO objective testable evidence to prove that that is true. So it's a matter of faith. Consequently , the "as far as it's translated/transmitted' correctly phrase of the 8th article , is precisely what Evangelicals ACTUALLY believe ,even if they bristle at admitting it.

[@mycatwould]

Boom!

[@kjcdb8er]

Very importantly to the NT, the Christological developments that are central to LDS claims that there was an overall apostasy were on-going in the 1st and 2nd centuries. We can *see* in the historical record that scribes were changing the texts to fit their understanding of the doctrines in contention, and have no reason to believe that earlier manuscripts avoided this problem. I think it was Jeff that made the point that the textual reliability relies on having so many manuscripts that is is possible-ish to recover the underlying text. Yet, this is precisely what we don't have during the most formative period of the Christological debates. We are in much worse shape with regard to the OT, and the scribal edits have been made apparent there as well. It is pretty clear that ongoing revelation is necessary to be certain of original and prophetically authentic teachings.

[@kjcdb8er]

Very importantly to the NT, the Christological developments that are central to LDS claims that there was an overall apostasy were on-going in the 1st and 2nd centuries. We can see in the historical record that scribes were changing the texts to fit their understanding of the doctrines in contention, and have no reason to believe that earlier manuscripts avoided this problem. I think it was Jeff that made the point that the textual reliability relies on having so many manuscripts that is is possible-ish to recover the underlying text. Yet, this is precisely what we don't have during the most formative period of the Christological debates. We are in much worse shape with regard to the OT, and the scribal edits have been made apparent there as well. It is pretty clear that ongoing revelation is necessary to be certain of original and prophetically authentic teachings.

[@brenthardaway3704]

Once a couple of copies of a book in the ancient world went out, it would have been impossible for a conspirator to track down and change all the texts. And that's only to change one book. And that person would have to have the cooperation of those close to the author. So when you have multiple textual families in different regions, it doesn't matter too much if the manuscripts are 100, 300 or 400 years after the originals. Sometimes in textual criticism the later texts might be considered more reliable. So Metzger saying 98% of what we have is hardly much different than saying 98% of the original, as there is little reason to believe there was an early conspiracy that made substantive changes to all extant copies. Faith? In a sense that everything that you can't empirically verify yourself requires at least some measure of faith, but that we can trust that we have everything that we really needed to know from the originals is on pretty firm ground.

[@oceancoast92657]

@@brenthardaway3704 Nobody is claiming any 'conspiracy'.. Simple facts.. we don't have any manuscripts from the 1st century when the texts were allegedly written. I use the term allegedly because Objectively a text is only as old as the oldest manuscript the text is found on.. You can believe it was written earlier, but that is simply a 'Belief'. It maybe a good belief, but a subjective belief nonetheless. Given the existing manuscript traditions don't really manifest themselves until centuries after the it's believed the text was written.. You simply have NO knowledge whatsoever to whether the source of the tradition is even remotely the same as what the original autographs.. You only have a subjective faith based belief. So Metzger's "source' could be centuries removed from the actual original. And no conspiracy is needed.. Lets say Paul wrote a manuscript.. and sent it off.. it then was copied and alterations made (intentional or unintentional) , and subsequently Paul's original is lost .. fell into a fire maybe.. Ok.. the copy is then sent out and another copy is made.. and some more errors and changes creep in.. and that copy gets copied multiple times and sent to different locations, and it's those copies that are sent to the different locations that begin the traditions you speak of.. However NONE of the traditions are using the text of the original autograph.. they are all based on a corrupted copy. No conspiracy here.. Just humans being humans making errors and sometimes embellishing.. One prime example that Scholars turn to is .. Corinthians. It's suggested that Paul didn't actually write 1 and 2 Corinthians.. but instead he had dictated to a scribe maybe four different letters that were later edited by a later person into the two letters we have today.. Thus there is NO original autograph for 1 and 2 Corinthians by Paul. And how about this.. The words of Jesus.. The only words of Jesus we have in the NT are those found in the Gospels.. however these Gospels were written by anonymous Greek speaking writers living hundreds of miles from Judea, decades after the fact. And if you following this Jesus and his Disciples were likely speaking Aramaic.. Not Greek. So right off the bat, the words of Jesus in the Gospels are from the get go .. A TRANSLATION. And given that they were written decades after the fact and we have no evidence of a written manuscript from the time of Jesus.. then the words of Jesus were preserved in an ORAL tradition.. Transmitted from person to person orally.. (Like the telephone game) So not only is the words of Jesus in the Gospels a "Translation", but from an oral Transmission from the get go.. So anyway you slice it.. Evangelicals even if they don't admit it.. do believe as LDS do, the Bible to be the word of God as far as it has been Transmitted/translated correctly.

[@DesertPrimrose]

I always appreciate your thoughtful and respectful discussions about my faith.

[@SCRUBXB]

Just Curious, Why wasn't this conversation with a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints? Doesn't make sense? why would you do that? I am a relatively new member of the Church and have enjoyed the back and fourth conversations that you have had with other members. You really missed a great opportunity for your followers here by not having a member of the Church discuss the Articles of Faith with you. but other than that keep up the good work.

[@kjcdb8er]

Article 3: Instead of "by" vs "for" ordinances it is a both by *and* for. Ordinances are the means by which God makes individual personal covenant with you. Covenant is a relationship, lasting far beyond the ordinance. But, the ordinance is the gateway. Looking at baptism in the bible and the early church is the clearest way Protestants can compare their teachings with those of LDS or Catholic and come to realize that there is something critical missing from their theology.

[@Elizabeth-rk3do]

Protestants worship the true and living God, who spoke the universe into existence from nothing. The true and living God is eternal. God has always been God and never had to work his way to Godhood. God is transcendent. God lives outside of time, space and matter. "The highest heavens can not contain him." Unlike pagan gods, the true and living God is not married. God created Adam out of the dust of the ground and Eve out of Adam's rib, no wife needed! God knew that no human being could ever measure up to his standard of perfection. Matthew 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect. No amount of tithing, keeping the commandments, church attendance, covenants, good works, church membership, learning secret grips, tokens, signs, handshakes, and passwords, etc., could ever justify us before a holy God. No one is worthy. The good news, the gospel, is that Christ has done the one work that was necessary to reconcile all mankind to God when he shed his blood on the cross, died, and rose again. (I Corinthians 15). Like the thief on the cross, all anyone needs to do is repent of their sins and put their faith in what Christ has already done for them. God offers forgiveness of sins, salvation, eternal life, and exaltation for free, if you are interested. That is how much God loves you! ❤️

[@natedawg2020]

I agree. Ironically, people need to give grace with the language here and chill out on the criticism. When we say “saved BY obedience” you could substitute the word “by” for “alongside” and keep the same intended meaning. Our doctrine is obviously grace-based rather than works-based, and it’s annoying when nonmembers incorrectly tell us what we believe. Obedience and faith are necessary, but atoning grace is the basis of salvation.

[@kjcdb8er]

@@Elizabeth-rk3do Hi Elizabeth. Thanks for responding :) Creation from Nothing and a Transcendent God are extra-biblical teachings. It is ironic how much sola-scriptura protestants rely on Catholic Tradition that is read into the Bible. Come to the Bible as a blank slate without pre-conceived Catholic or Platonic ideas and you will not find creation from nothing or absolute transcendence of either the Father or the Son. Do you believe that Deity has both a masculine and a feminine within itself? On works and worthiness: you are entirely correct. None of these things justify sin, nor do LDS say that they do. But, it is unfortunate that Protestant teachings against works lead so many persons to misunderstand and disparage the nature and essential importance of fundamental principles such as baptism and priesthood. In this, Protestants would do well to go back and revisit their Catholic roots. "James 2:21-24 Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone." Thanks for sharing your testimony about God's love and the reality of Jesus' infinite atonement! Amen!

[@stephtimms1776]

What did Jesus say about those who did not help the least of these? Did he say they would still go to heaven? Matthew 25:41 "Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink..." Also, Matthew 7:21 21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."

[@stephtimms1776]

Yet we supposedly don't believe in the Jesus of the Holy Bible.. according to people who don't believe what he clearly taught, again!

[@bernadettechaffee572]

A lot has messed here. Jeff, needs to sit down with Elder Bednar, Elder Oaks to thoroughly cover the 13 Articles of Faith. Accountability is individual not Adam’s transgression or anyone else. We are accountable of our own action/ sins.

[@andrewlamb2099]

I think I have to agree with many of the LDS comments here that this video is a bit frustrating. I love learning about the evangelical approach to things, and in that sense, you guys did a great job. However, it's really weird for your channel that there was no Latter-day Saint present to explain the meanings and how things are understood, so that you'd be reacting to the actual teachings, not your understanding (or not) of the writings. I totally see how having an LDS person present may have turned this into a challenging video to make, because it would decrease your ability to speak freely on certain topics. However, isn't that the point of your channel? Many evangelicals poke holes in our teachings on KZbin. The things I always love about your videos, usually, is that you set up conversations so that holes can't be poked and we leave feeling that we've learned something about your context - instead of leaving feeling unheard. Asking for clarity on things you missed is a worthy effort, but the things you missed are likely not things that would fit well into random comments on KZbin.

[@kjcdb8er]

Article 2: The way the fall was framed by your discussion, LDS wouldn't differ much given our view of the "natural man" (Mosiah 3:16-19): The principle purpose in the way the article is framed is to contrast Catholic teachings on original sin which require baptism of infants for salvation.

[@paw-of-affection]

19 For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father.

[@christopherpeery7436]

Great job! I appreciate your respectfulness with handling our faith!

[@jessea2871]

Handling of your faith? He's crushing it and calling it out on the blasphemy it is.

[@thenexus1789]

No shade to Pastor Jeff but how have you read a Brigham Young biography before the BoM?

[@TheWrath2010]

Isn't it very telling?

[@BrendonKing]

@@TheWrath2010 are you afraid that learning about a prophet will negatively influence Jeff's perception of the church?

[@AaronShafovaloff1]

Love both of you brothers. Grace and peace in Christ.

[@latter-dayfilmguy1382]

I mean no disrespect with this question, but why would you have someone who doesn't completely understand our beliefs be a part of this video? Would you feel a video with two Latter-day Saints discussing evangelical beliefs be credible? I love your content, however not having a member of the church present makes this entire thing one sided and biased.

[@BrendonKing]

Define someone who "completely understands" your beliefs. I assume you believe only faithful members of the church are those who can "completely understand"

[@latter-dayfilmguy1382]

@@BrendonKing My comment is 100% self explanatory. Not my fault you can't comprehend it.

[@BrendonKing]

@@latter-dayfilmguy1382 so I'm correct. Your definition of "completely understands" would be a faithful member of the church. Nothing else would satisfy. You do not believe it possible for a non-member to completely understand what are supposed to be the basics of your church’s faith system.

[@hyrumrobinson6493]

Good effort. I was pleased with the good faith approach you tried to take and I expected there to be differences. Thanks for treating those differences with kindness and trying to give brother Joseph the benefit of the doubt. I think that helped you to get really close to understanding them. Thanks.

[@sampson1952]

Related to the idea of updating the 13 articles of Faith, I would suggest that the D & C serves that purpose

[@MichaelDeyholos]

Very respectful, very impressive. Thank you!

[@Landonpfile]

Hey Jeff, are you going to continue your Book of Mormon reading?

[@mycatwould]

He mentioned in a video with Greg from CWIC media that he was halfway through Ether, but for his own reasons he wouldn’t be doing any more videos on his readings.

[@DJBattlewax]

@@mycatwould that's a bummer and it's going to agitate my OCD to have that part of this series be incomplete.

[@BGCflyer]

@@DJBattlewax ...same 🙂

[@BrianTerrill]

​@@mycatwouldmaybe Jeff is scared of having to take on Moroni's promise.

[@Compulsive-Elk7103]

@@BrianTerrillno

[@sophistikate100]

Great conversation. Thanks for posting it so we could all participate. I'm grateful for the dignified way of talking about our similarities, while also our beliefs. I'm inspired by Kyle's understanding and knowledge of a church's history he doesn't belong to and the compassion he shows. I would love to see you have a conversation with Derik Dirkmaat or Casey Griffeths and Scott Woodward on these or other historical documents. I am enjoying learning more about mainstream Christianity and your beliefs as evangelicals through your channel. I am reading Alma 17-22 right now and your work and ministry, Pastor Jeff, is reminding me of the trust with his audience that Ammon built with King Lamoni in chapter 18 of Alma to prepare him to WANT to know who God is - His character and His relationship with us. PS, I am waiting for my fight criticism with curiosity shirt now. Thanks again!

[@SamoanBrasileiro]

27.27 The bible translation is because with even one passage of the scripture many pastors had different interpretations of its meaning. Hence so forth that it has been translated correctly. Blame God himself for saying all the faiths are false. He is the one that came to Joseph and introduced Christ to him and shared his actual Gospel and must needed knowledge for the new upcoming dispensation the ppl didnt even have the opportunity to experience the saviors actual home as they completely had to go off generation of shared stories about a Christ no one ever got to see. Just always taught abour

[@Habichiwoowoo]

I loved this conversation. Actually, I'm loving everything I've watched so far. I appreciate your openness and inquisitiveness. Carry on, friend!

[@TipsWithTulip]

Where is a representative from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints? He/she could have explained a lot. 🤔 Otherwise, GREAT JOB GUYS 🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽

[@janedunlap3518]

Finally...thank you for this Pastor. As a new believer and former Mormon this has been very informative and answered many questions.😊🙏

[@oceancoast92657]

3rd Article of faith.. Jeff and Kyle respectfully reframe "by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel" into a more Evangelical friendly phrase by changing 'By' to 'For'. However, I think this is incorrect. There is a bit of a nuance here. They did good in noting the over arching context is "through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved" meaning this is Christ centered. However the subtle nuance is this, It's through "FAITH" we are saved Faith in that Christ who brings that attonement. Yet what constitutes "FAITH" from non-Faith.. And that's where obedience to the laws and ordinances of the "Gospel" As it's written in James .. Faith without the works is dead. Now the word "Works" gets used in multiple ways by different writers in the NT.. Paul often used that word to describe 'works of the Mosaic' law'.. but James is speaking of works or efforts consistent with the Gospel that Jesus taught. For instance If Jesus commanded to be Baptized, and you willfully disregarded that ordinance, do you really have "Faith in Jesus".. I would say no.. Notice I said , willfully disregard, not passively or ignorantly.. there are those who have faith and will to be obedient, but life's situation prevents actual obedience, they are different than those who claim to have faith, and willfully disobey or disregard the ordinances of the Gospel. So the nuance is this.. Obedience is inseparably connected to "FAITH".. so if you reword the 3rd article of faith.. It might read: We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by Faith in Christ Just substitute Obedience to the laws and ordinances with Faith in Christ. Faith in Christ is manifest by obedience. Another nuance: that is put forth when Jeff substitutes the word 'FOR' for 'BY' This is a tensor.. In other words, 'For' is presenting the obedience comes AFTER being saved. Which is common for many Evangelicals to believe the ARE SAVED and not seeing salvation as something that occurs in the future. However, LDS would see it a bit more objectively.. That Salvation is something happening in the Future. And such make much more objective sense, since the judgment for one's sins is in theory something that is yet to happen we are in effect not actually in peril at this very moment.. but we will be in peril in the future. Thus it's more accurate and best you can actually say is that you have the hope and guarantee through faith in Christ that you're salvation is assured. It's a rather subtle nuance.. and falls into semantics often.. LDS might say we have faith in Christ and we manifest that faith through our obedience with the hope and assurance that our faith saves us from our sins. And Evangelical might say 'I am saved from my sins because of my faith, so my obedience is because I was saved. " In either case the actions and behavior are identical, with the same end in mind. Thus it's more semantics than anything material. The only time this nuance becomes material is when an Evangelical behaves in a way that is not consistent with someone who has been 'Saved'.. and the answer to that is often, they were never saved in the first place. Since LDS don't see that 'salvation; as happening present time, this is of no consequence, since you still have opportunity to have faith and be saved , which would also be the Evangelical remedy to the same.

[@kimberlymaycock9706]

The context of James faith without works is dead when read in context has nothing to do with religious acts or rituals but is actually speaking about works of service to the poor and needy, good works inspired by the indwelling of the holy spirit that follows faith in Christ. Our works of love prove our faith is real and living not dead.

[@jerry_phillips]

Overall you guys did a very respectful job and I'm more informed. I love your respectful take. Please do your best to ignore the haters.

[@coriandkeliunleashed]

Sola scriptura is always Interesting to me in that the “Catholic Bible” was changed by a man….and has changed by many other reformers. It’s contradictory.

[@BrendonKing]

Catholics do not believe in Sola Scriptura.

[@henryeowens]

Great discussion. Thanks to both of you.

[@jake12.48]

When we talk about speaking in tongues, it's not screaming and shouting gibberish like y'all do. It's the ability to learn languages quickly to share the gospel to those who are ready and prepared to receive it.

[@jessea2871]

"screaming and showering gibberish like y'all do". who are you talking about?

[@jessea2871]

@EricWest-bd1cf Meanwhile, in the temple pre 1990 saints would pantomime disemboweling themselves and slitting their own throats. You should really look at how outrageous your own beliefs and practices are before pointing at other religions. Hypocrisy runs deep in the LDS church.

[@joeshriver778]

Not only learning a new language, but speaking to someone who’s only language is not yours and they understand you

[@jake12.48]

@@joeshriver778 that would be the gift of interpretation of tongues not speaking in tongues

[@tracienielson7183]

@@jessea2871 I've been to Pentecostal churches that do just that. They were shouting unintelligible noises, waving their arms, one guy was running up and down the isle. It was pretty wild and kiind of scary. I will say they had great music.

[@bearsabove]

Pastor Jeff, please have this discussion with an authority.

[@jjohansen86]

On the gift of tongues: This is actually somewhat complicated. There are manifestations of the gift of tongues that at least resemble the sort of charismatic events most often associated with Pentecostals, though Latter-Day Saints would affirm that there are at least a few distinctions here. For one, there was an expectation of order that isn't always present in charismatic Pentecostal speaking in tongues. In some ways, the discussions that I've read around it center on it being an act of faith, that you would be moved upon by the Holy Ghost to speak in tongues, and you would have the faith to do so in spite of any fears you might have that you might do something wrong or look weird, and then someone else would often stand up and translate in that same spirit of faith. But there were also cautions that all of these things were to edify, that if it really is from God then it will edify, build faith, enlighten. So there were always these cautions around this kind of charismatic event, and there was supposed to be a certain order to it, but it was and is believed that this sort of thing could be and was of God (though I suspect that in a modern setting with a modern congregation it would feel so out of place that this sort of thing would be unlikely to edify, which may be why we don't see it anymore, God is even better at being all things to all men in an appropriate way than was Paul, so he may hold back charismatic speaking in tongues types of events when they wouldn't help the congregation, but would make that happen in places where it would help). At the same time, there's a common discussion around the gift of tongues that it may be manifest in different ways, including the way that I learned Romanian relatively easily in the MTC at the start of my mission, that that is a gift of God and a different kind of manifestation of the gift of tongues.

[@chadclca1]

@HelloSaints , your choice to engage with respect and charity is really world-changing. All the best!

[@EricSmyth4Christ]

Why not have a Latter-day Saint there with you ?

[@patimontana7224]

There have been many testimonies of elders on missions who went out and were not good at speaking the language but when the spirit was strong, they could understand every word they were hearing and could speak every word to share the gospel of Jesus Christ. So this gift continues today.

[@kathrinebeeder9892]

Thirteenth article of faith is my very most favorite. In my youth we were encouraged to memorize them, which I did. They don’t emphasize memorization so much anymore. I feel it’s disappointing. But they must be emphasizing something else. The only change that I recall is the 10th article, where we used to say, “upon THIS, the American continent”. They removed “this” because the church became more worldwide and enlarged membership outside of the United States. And the multitude of opinions on how to pronounce “paradisiacal”.

[@AcheliusDecimus]

This video also proves on going revelation still happens. As we get closer to the Lord's coming, and the world turns upside down. All of God's children need to come together.

[@rebekahperrin5734]

Thanks for going over the articles of faith. I felt no malice intention in your discussion. It just still makes leery as to why Jeff chose the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter say saints to be so curious about. And when will it end? What denomination will be next? Also, why has the guest written a book about Mormonism? Why not just keep to his Faith. All in all i guess its a good thing that my Faith is being discussed so nicely by Jeff. And the guest was cool too.

[@tracienielson7183]

He has moved to Utah. He is scope locked on the LDS members. In each video, he plants some seed of doubt.

[@rileypico507]

As a lifelong member of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I love to hear the viewpoint of others as they read the articles of faith, thank you for sharing! Your videos help me have more open and understanding conversations with people of other faith as it helps me respect and understand where they are coming from. In regards to the third and fourth AOF, I just wanted to share that the ordinances required for salvation through the atonement of Jesus Christ are only those first ordinances and principles listed in the 4th AOF (Faith, Repentance, Baptism, and receiving the Holy Ghost). Those are what are required to be made clean from our sins and saved from spiritual death (salvation). The ordinances that are performed in temples that you briefly mention, are not part of the basic requirements of salvation, which is why they are not listed in AOF #4. The ordinances performed in temples are a continuation of our covenant relationship with Jesus Christ that help us strive toward exaltation (the highest state of happiness and glory in the celestial realm), but are not required for salvation, rather a choice that we can choose to make if we desire to further that covenant relationship beyond salvation. I believe I’ve heard you mention that you’ve learned about our belief in the different glories of heaven, so hopefully that won’t sound too foreign, but I just wanted to clarify that difference between salvation and exaltation and which ordinances apply to which. Once again, really appreciate the viewpoint you both offer! Thank you!

[@kelbexplorin]

Dr. Luke Drake in the BYU classics department has a great perspective on different translations of the bible. He was trained at Harvard divinity and UNC Ancient Mediterranean Religions. He might be willing to talk with you on what Mormons believe about the ancient 1 st century church.

[@BGCflyer]

...this is a great idea. I'd love to hear them discuss the Bible

[@dnengel84]

The discussion around the Bible translation was a bit weird to me. As if LDS Scholars are not aware of Biblical translation history.

[@pensadorcebr]

I love the 13 articles of faith. So clear!! I did decide to be a member of the church after reading this articles. Thanks Joseph!

[@nwwinters]

A great, open, and respectful conversation. We do believe #5 is relating to the Priesthood.

[@bmacarthur]

Gift of tongues is something i have personally experienced. On my mission' about 6 months in. I wasn't confident on speaking spanish, and had a new companion who couldn't speak at all. I had many lessons I was able to say and explain complex thoughts with vocabulary i hadnt learned when the Spirit was strong, and immediately after the lesson was over could not replicate. That is the godt of tongues. I was literally a mouthpiece for Spirit to use to spread the Gospel. This is how missionaries in the Church are able to become fluent in complicated and difficult languages in a matter of months.

[@PipeDaddy907]

Was anyone else distracted by them NOT singing at least one? 😂😂