Book of Mormon: Blood Atonement

0:02 Looking at our world from a theological perspective. This is the Theology Central podcast making Theology Central. Have you ever been in a situation where you have to do something but it's absolutely and completely irritating, Like you know you have to do it, but it's irritating. You don't really want to do it, but you feel you have to. Well, that is the situation for this broadcast. I don't want to do this. In fact, I want to just move on and forget everything that comes before. But I feel like I have no choice, and it's very irritating because I don't really want to be doing this right now.

0:45 I want I could be reading, I could be listening to music, I could go watch a television show. I could just, I don't know, just walk around in circles for thirty minutes. I feel like it would probably be more beneficial than doing this, but I feel like an obligation, like I have to do this. So I guess we're going to do this. Are you ready? I hope you are all right, ladies and gentlemen. It is Tuesday, November the twenty sixth, twenty twenty four. It is currently nine thirty pm Central Time, and I'm coming to you live from the Theology Central Studio located right here in Abilene, Texas.

1:28 Now everything started this morning, right. I was like, okay, sermons two point oh app sermon challenge. We've got to bring that to some kind of dramatic conclusion. We have basically about a month to pull that off. All right, So let me look at the sermon's two point oh app. Let's look at what new sermons are being added. Let's look around what's going on. What can I talk about? What sermons could I review? Let's do this right? And so I'm looking and I'm like, oh, look at that. There is a sermon entitled Internet theologian. All right, Internet theologians. Okay, this could be interesting, right because typically when a pastor or talks about Internet theologians or Internet theology or Christian podcasters or Christian bloggers, it's almost inevitable they are going they're going to say something negative Internet theologians. You've got these Internet theologians running around thinking that they know the Bible and that they can teach the Bible, and they don't know what they're talking about. You can't trust it. Oh, You've got these so called Christian podcasters and you've got these Christian bloggers. It's almost always negative, derogatory, almost an attack, almost being dismissive, as if those Internet theologians are those Christian podcasters, they don't really have the knowledge or the insight or the education to be able to speak about such lofty matters. What they really need to do is

2:59 listen to the pastors and churches. Who are you know, the experts and all of this. That's kind of the way it is presented. Now, Maybe just maybe I could be a little bit sensitive, right, I could be a little defensive, because well, I'm the host of a podcast called Theology Central. Hmm, I'm an Internet theologian. Okay, I get it, I get so maybe I could just be a little a little bit sensitive. I'm more than aware of acknowledging that is true. I'm acknowledging that is true. But I knew this. Ooh, Internet Theologians. Okay, I'm gonna review this. And so I got ready to download it, but the audio was not available. So we moved on and we reviewed a different sermon. Right, I thought that was somewhat beneficial. And then later in the afternoon, what did we find? We found the audio for Internet theologians, and we did a review, and we did not review the whole thing, but we've reviewed enough to come to this very frustrating conclusion. In a sermon, this I don't I don't even have words for this. In a sermon criticizing Internet theologians as not being trustworthy, as you can't you should not trust them. A sermon criticizing Internet theologians is a sermon then that is filled with misinformation or let me just say this, there are sections of the

4:29 sermon I won't say filed, because then I've got to quantify that, right, I got to try to measure it. In a sermon criticizing Internet theologians is misinformation, wrong information, things that are just absolutely fraudulent, misrepresentation, not just so so many issues I does. Does anyone not see how absurd that is? So I tried to correct some of the wrong information, but I told you I would, I'm back, and I would really, really, really really try to to try to dig in. And the thing that we're going to need to really try to clarify some of this is right here in my hand, the Book of Mormon.

5:11 All right, I'm holding a physical copy of the Book of Mormon. I will be reading from the Book of Mormon so that we can verify any claims that are being made. Okay, so I have it right here. Okay, But the absurdity of this in fact, in fact, not only is it absurd, not only is it irritating, it's it's profoundly ironic. I mean, don't you think see what I did there? Don't? Uh? Okay, Okay, some of you may have got it right. It's profoundly ironic that a sermon criticizing Internet theologians for their lack of accountability and the spread of misinformation would itself require correction for significant factual and ideological errors. That's hilarious. Okay, that's hilarious. In fact, I didn't write those words. AI wrote those words because I took the sermon and gave it to Ai. And AI said, it's profoundly ironic that a sermon criticizing Internet theologians for their lack of accountability and the spread of misinformation would itself require correction for significant factual and theological errors.

6:31 That cracked me. Even AI was like, what is this? This is ridiculous. It's ridiculous, ladies and gentlemen, all right, this situation this entire situation what I'm getting ready to try to do, and I'm gonna try to do it in a somewhat abbreviated way. I could spend hours just taking this sermon apart and going, well, what about that? But I want to try to make it somewhat When I say abbreviated, I know some of you are already laughing. Look, I understand, and I understand. I try my best, right, but this situation highlights the universality. I want you to hear this. This highlights the universality of human fallibility. This situation just demonstrates all human beings are fallible, whether on the Internet or whether standing behind a pulpit. All right, all of us are fallible. All of us say things that are not true, all of us say things that are incorrect. All of us are guilty of mishandling the scripture because we are fallible human beings. And guess what.

7:39 This shows that there's a need for discernment, regardless of the platform or authority of the speaker. I don't care if he's standing behind a pulpit. I don't care if he's sitting in front of a microphone and a studio in West Texas. You, and this is the frustrating part. You, the individual, You're supposed to have the discernment to take your Bible and figure out is the pastor telling the truth? Is the non pastor telling the truth? Is it the church that tells the truth or is it the internet theologian telling the truth? And you have to figure it out because see we decided as non Catholics. Oh no, no, no, no no, the church doesn't have the authority. There is no magistyal authority. The authority is in the Bible. And now every individual has to go to the Bible figure it out, and then they're supposed to decide what is true or what is false. That sounds like a great system, but guess what. Nobody agrees on anything. I don't know what you're supposed to do sitting in the pew. I guess you're just basically quit your job and spend twenty four hours a day, seven days a week trying to figure out the Bible. Of course, nobody in two thousand years has figured it out. But I'm sure you can do so. This entire situation, not only is it frustrating, No is it irritating. Not only is it ironic. Don't you think our all of those things? For a number of reasons. The message, I'll state it this way, the very message that the pastor was preaching about Internet theologians,

9:13 it undermines itself. The sermon critiques internet theologians for spreading misinformation, yet it includes multiple, multiple inaccurate claims, such as misrepresenting the Book of Mormon's teaching on the atonement. I've got it right here. It makes some claims about Wescott and hort and Bible translations that at maybe at best are unverifiable. I think that's I think that's okay. I think it clearly he oversimplifies or possibly distorts historical events like the origins of Islam and Satanic verses. Now we could argue all I'm saying is, when you get into the origins of it Islam, or you get into the novel Satanic Verses, there's a lot more there than just this oversimplification. The way that it was done by failing to uphold the standard of accuracy demanded of Internet theologians, the speaker demonstrates the same issues he's criticizing. Hey, you cannot trust those Internet theologians. They would give you false information. You don't know where they're getting there, could be get there, They could be getting their information from demons. For crying out loud because you know you don't know them. But of course if someone's speaking in a church, it's just because you can't make this stuff up. This whole thing is

10:46 ironic because he talks about a lack of accountability, but if it applies both ways. See the pastor accuses Internet theologians of operating without accountability or oversight, but the same criticism can be applied to sir preach. Within local churches. Many congregants may accept a pastor's claim without question, assuming them to be accurate due to their position or authority. Many people sit in the church and we've listened to sermon after sermon after sermon where pastors say outrageous, ridiculous things and you hear the people in the congregation going Amen, Amen. Sometimes they even clap. You're like, that's false, that's false now, But hey, you can't trust Internet theologians because there's no one to hold them accountable. Have you seen the crazy things that's been done in churches and the name of Jesus, Okay, I mean, come on in this particular case, the errors in the sermon highlights the need for all leaders, whether online or in person, to be accountable for their statements.

11:46 The critique of internet theologians lack of oversight is undermined when the speaker's own errors are not challenged or corrected in real time. Who's correcting him? They posted the sermon on the Internet, so no one's like, wait a minute, what you said there was not the platform in. Which it's hosted at. It's it's posted at. They're not going to do anything about nobody's going to do anything about it. This whole thing is kind of ironic, because, well, trust should not be blind, right. The sermon encourages listeners to test the claims of the Internet theologians against scripture and sound doctrine, a valid and necessary practice. However, the errors in the pastor's own message illustrates that trust in church leadership should not be blind. The Bible itself encourages believers to test all teachings. See well, the pastor is warning against uncritically trusting Internet theologians, but implicitly asked the congregation to trust their own claims even when they're demonstratably false.

12:55 He's like, hey, don't trust them, but you can trust me even when the information is just completely fraudulent. Now, I got I got more things I could say here. I have like ten fifteen, I don't even know how many points here that I was thinking about and trying to figure out and articulate and write out and looking at and relying on AI's critique of the sermon as well. And but I'm not going to go through all of them, because again, I want this just to be somewhat abbreviated. But as you can tell, the whole thing is some is somewhat ironic. It's it's irritating, it's ironic, it's frustrating.

13:38 And a sermon that's critiquing Internet theologians has to be corrected for its wrong information. Does not does anyone else not see the absurdity of it. So I guess we'll just get to the correction part, all right. I think I've got this cued up. I went back. Now, there's multiple things said in the sermon. There's a there's things about Mormonism, about Islam, about Westcott and Hort, and I think there's also something said about an individual who claimed to be a Satanist. I think was found out that he made up the story. I think he also mentions that person somewhere later in the sermon, if I remember correctly. But Wescott and Horte, we could talk. We could take the claims about Wescott and hort and translations. I mean, he also seems to imply that I get well, there's a lot of things that are implied. Wait, we could take the entire sermon apart. But I really I don't want to spend any more time with the sermon, to be honest, I don't, So I just want to go back because we covered this in my review. We covered this in my review, but I said I wanted to come back just to make sure that everyone knows that I was being accurate and that I was trying my best to be fair. So I went and dug through the closet. Found one of my copies of the Book of Mormon I used to have. I used to have a lot of these things, but here's I have this one.

14:57 It's good to go. I don't have any markings or anything in this one. So this is one I don't think I used very much, but it's ready to go, and I've got all the references that I think I need to be able to demonstrate this, and I'm going to try to demonstrate at the same time some actual problems and Mormonism when it comes to the atonement and salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, because of Chryslin, because there are actual issues that you could mention without misrepresenting other things. But I digress. So are you ready to hear this? This is what was said in the sermon. This is what sparked me having to be here at nine forty four pm on a Tuesday evening when I would prefer to be doing. I don't know anything else right now, but here we go.

15:42 It is where false theology comes from. In big quantities are small quantities. Joseph Smith in the Mormons, Joseph Smith has that story about he saw an angel and the angel Moroni, but began to tell him about these golden plays. Let him do these golden plates. And out of the golden plates come the Book of Mormon. And in the Book of Mormon you'll find out that while Jesus was a great man who became God through his good works the way that anybody can become God, he did not start out as God, and you also find out that Christianity is good if it's proper. But you have to be sure about a few things. One of them was which there's no blood atonement for sin?

16:27 All right? His claim is emphatic. The Book of Mormon teaches that there is no blood atonement for sin. That's the claim. So remember I had Ai review the entire sermon. I had AI critique it, analyze it, summarize it. I mean, I had to do a number of functions on it, right, And so this is how AI began. It's kind of dealing with this section. I mean, AI's dealing with the sermon is I mean, there's like, I don't even know how many pages of notes it would be if I printed it out, it would be a lot because because as it was analyzing, I was asking questions. So it turned into this lengthy, lengthy, lengthy, lengthy thing. But based on the uploaded transcript, this is what AI said. The speaker makes the claim that the Book of Mormon teaches that there is no blood atonement for sin. This claim is false because the Book of Mormon explicitly titches the necessity of christ atoning sacrifice, including the shedding of his blood as central to salvation. Here is a detailed analysis. First, the speaker's claim. The speaker implies that the Book of Mormon denies the doctrine of blood atonement, aligning it with other religions that reject Christ's sacrificial death. Right. That's that's

18:01 kind of the class. I don't think he implied, AI is being nice. You just heard it. It wasn't. It wasn't implied, it was. It was dogmatically asserted. Okay, that's what it was. But so what does the Book of Mormon actually teach? Well, the Book of Mormon repeatedly teaches that Jesus Christ atonings U teaches of Jesus christ atoning sacrifice, including the shedding of his blood, and that it is essential for the salvation of humanity. Here is some sections here or some passages. The first is from the Book of Messiah Mosiah M O. S I A H. Messiah.

18:48 If I if I mispronounce any of the names of these books, please forgive me. I don't spend a lot of time, you know, reading the Book of Mormon or listening to things on it, or listening to preaching where there's turned to the Book of Mosiah. But I'm m s I Ah, I'm gonna go with Mosiah, all right, Messiah chapter three. I'm gonna turn here Messiah chapter three. And be patient. It may take me a minute to find some of the books. Okay, again, it's been I used to spend a lot more time in the Book of Mormon when because when I lived in Nebraska, I had Mormons coming to my house it felt like almost every other week, right, So I was always dealing with them, talking to them. And as I've said before, I even had some of the elders come to my Sunday school class there at my church in Bellevue, Nebraska. So I had to be prepared to deal with them a lot.

19:41 So but that was what over twenty years ago, I mean twenty five years. I don't even how many years ago. It was a long time ago. So please forgive me if there's if there's any delay in getting to some of these books are not stated or pronouncing them correctly. But Messiah chapter three, verse seven, and I quote and Lo, he shall suffer temptations and pain of body, hunger, thirst, and fatigue, even more than man can suffer, except it be unto death. For behold blood cometh from every pore, So great shall be his anguish for the wickedness and the abomination of his people. And he shall be called Jesus Christ, the Son of God, Father of heaven and Earth, the creator of all things from the beginning, and his mother shall be called Mary. All right, So it talks about him shedding his blood. Why is he doing so for the wickedness and the abomination of his people. That's from the Book of Mormon. All right, Well, but wait, how about the book of Almah alma I think it's chapter thirty four. Almah chapter thirty four, Almah, chapter thirty four, and I think it's verse eight and ten. Almuch chapter thirty four. Start in verse eight, right, Almah, chapter thirty four, Verse eight. And now, behold, I will testify unto you

21:14 of myself that these things are true. Behold, I say unto you that I do know that Christ shall come among the children of men to take upon him the transgressions of his people, and that he shall atone for the sins of the world. For the Lord God hath spoken it. For it is expedient that an atonement should be made, for according to the great plan of the Eternal God, there must be an atonement made, or else all mankind must unavoidably perish. Yay, all are hardened. Yay, all are fallen and are lost, and must perish, except it be through the atonement, which is the which is expedient, which is expedient, should be made. So talks about sacrifice verse ten. Is expedient, that there should be a great and last sacrifice. Yeah, not a sacrifice of man, neither a beast, neither of any manner of foul. For it shall not be a human sacrifice. But it must be an infinite and eternal sacrifice. So it talks about a sacrifice, talks about an atonement, talks about him shedding his blood.

22:26 Some would summarize Alma thirty four eight through ten this way. There is no other way or means whereby man can be saved, only in and through the atoning blood of Jesus Christ. Another reference is second Nephi Chapter two, verse seven, Second Nephi Chapter two, verse seven. Second Nephi Chapter two, verse seven, Second Nephi Chapter two, ver seven. Behold he off with himself a sacrifice for sin to answer the end of the law. Unto all those who have a broken heart and a contract spirit an onto none else can the can the ends of the law be answered?

23:14 All right? So these verses demonstrate at least in part, that the Book of Mormon affirms the centrality of Christ's atoning sacrifice, including his shed blood, as a means of salvation. You cannot just dogmatically make this assertion and a sermon where you're complaining about internet theologians and then you say things that are just demonstratably false. That's just all that's maddening. The Book of Mormon teaches the traditional Christian view that humanity has fallen and in need of redemption, which comes to Christ's atonement. It emphasizes faith in Christ, repentance, and reliance on his atoning sacrifice. Now, now again, I'm not saying everything about their teaching on the atonement is right.

24:00 People are going to get all confused because because I'm trying to offer the nuance here, but this part about it just doesn't teach blood atonement is just not accurate. And I think, and this is me going above and beyond, because I could just say this is demonstratably false and say the end of the broadcast. But I think that there's a potential reason or potential source for this misunderstanding because it's it's Sometimes this concept is confused with LDS doctrine. The speaker in that sermon may be conflating the teaching of the Book of Mormon with other Latter day Saint doctrines, such as the controversial nineteenth century teaching a blood atonement.

24:46 This teaching is not found in the Book of Mormon. This teaching suggested that some sins might require the sinner's own blood to be shed as an atonement. Later, they would say, well, if you commit a really really really really really bad sin, you may have to shed your own blood. Your own blood may have to be shed in order for an atonement to be made. Now, I think that's heretical. I don't think it's accurate. But if you're going to speak of this subject, at least get something factually right here. It was a speculative idea. This is very important discussed by leaders like Brigham Young, but it is not official LDS doctrine and it is unrelated to the Book of Mormon. So even if you want to say Brigham Young said this, it's not official Mormon doctrine.

25:39 It's not even official Mormon doctrine and it has nothing to do with the Book of Mormon. You can't just. I mean, look, if you're going to criticize internet theologians, well then you know, maybe the reason there's internet theologians because maybe sometimes those of us on the Internet can do better and do more than churches do. Oh wait, I'm not supposed to say that. Well, look, I've got to sit here now correct what was stated, and just just for the if the true irony of all of it is the message I'm correcting criticizing internet theologians has posted on the Internet, and which he brags in the sermon that he has a message on the Internet that has over a million downloads. Critics of Mormonism often conflate broader LDS teachings or practices with the content of the Book of Mormon itself, leading to inaccurate claims about the text. Now, what I have found dealing with a lot of Mormons is sometimes I think they don't know the Book of Mormon because I think in some cases the Book of Mormon teaches some things that we believe better than our than the Bible does. Is okay, but that's a whole different subject, and we could spend hours going through different things of the Book of Mormon.

26:52 So the claim made by the speaker that the Book of Mormon denies blood atonement is factually false. On the contrary, the Book of Mormons strongly affirms the necessity of Jesus Christ a tony sacrifice, including the shedding of his blood, as essential for human salvation. So then I live on the air, I asked Ai at that time, Hey, wait a minute, where is this coming from? Because immediately when he said it, I'm like, I know this is not true. So I was having a conversation with Ai during it, and Ai during the live broadcast, while the mic was muted and we were listening to the pastor preach. AI was telling me this, the Book of Mormon does not teach no blood atonement for sin, but rather emphasizes the necessity of Jesus christ atoning sacrifice, including the shedding of his blood, is essential to salvation, all right, And so at this point he gives Ai gives some explicit references to christo atonement Mosiah chapter three, verse seven, which we've already looked at Ether, which is, we haven't looked at that the book of Ether. I never can find a book of Ether. There it is chapter twelve. It's et e t h e r, so I believe it's pronounced ether e t h e r Ether Chapter twelve, verse eleven. Ether, Chapter twelve, verse eleven. Wherefore by faith was the law of Moses given, But in the gift of his son

28:25 Hath God prepared a more excellent way. And it is by faith that it has been fulfilled. All right now, this is the idea of faith in the coming Christ, who atones for sin. And then if you continue reading in this section, I don't know if it's in this section, but you put much must put your faith in Christ. And of course those other passages show that Christ is coming to be a sacrifice and to atone for sin, with including the shedding of his blood. Alma chapter thirty four. Behold, I sent to speak these things unto you that you may learn wisdom, that you may learn that there is no other way or means whereby man can be saved only and through the atoning blood of Jesus Christ. I think that's Alma thirty four. We looked at Alma thirty four, I think just a little earlier. Let me make sure this Alma thirty four. Yeah, it's written a little different.

29:25 We read it a little while ago. I'll just back up here Alma thirty four to eight. And now behold, I will testify to you myself that these things are true. Behold, I say unto you that I do know that Christ shall come among the children men to take upon him the transgressions of his people, and that he shall atone for the sins of the world. For the Lord has spoken it. For it is expedient that an atonement should be made, for according to the great plan of the Eternal God, that there must be an atonement made, or else all mankind must unavoidably perish. Yay, all are hardened, Yay, all are fallen, and all are law ust and must perish, except it be through the atonement, which is the expedient, should be made for his expedient, that there should be a great and last sacrifice. All right, others which state it this way, I am sent to speak these things unto you that you may learn wisdom, that you may learn that there is no other way or means whereby man can be saved only and through the atoning blood of Jesus Christ. Second f five, Chapter two, Verse seven describes Christ offering himself as a sacrifice to answer the ends of the Law, which we read a little bit earlier.

30:32 So these are the passages that will our go to over and over and over all. Right, So the Book of Mormon teaches of Christ being a sacrifice and providing atonement to save us from our sins. That is just a fact, and anything that would say otherwise is factually not true. Now, let's do this quickly. All right, let's do this. Now. I'm going to go through these quickly because there are some problems with Mormon theology and when it comes to the atonement and salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, because of Christ alone, because the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints LDS, it diverges significantly significantly from traditional Christian doctrines on the atonement. Right. For example, if we talk about grace and works and salvation, the Mormon view is that they are the LDS Church. Mormons would teach that salvation comes through both grace and works, while Christ's atonement provides resurrection for all. Universal salvation or immortality.

31:48 Eternal life living in the highest level of heaven requires adherence to specific commands ordinances and good works see see Christ died, He made. Atonement may bring about a kind of a universal salvation or immortality. Everyone will live forever. But if you really want to be exalted to Heaven, well, now that's going to be based off works. It's very nuanced and layered the way they would handle this. For example, Second Nephi, Chapter twenty five, verse twenty three in the Book of Mormon. For we know that it is by grace that we are saved after all we can do. This verse is often interpreted by Mormons to mean that grace is applied after an individual has done their best to obey God's laws and commands doctrines and covenants. Chapter I think it's like one hundred and thirty twenty through twenty one. Blessings include salvation are tied to obedience to specific laws and ordinances. So it's very much a works based system. It destroys salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, because of chryst alone, and even what the atonement does is very different than and how we would understand it all. Right, now, I got a lot more here. We could go on the role of ordinances in the Mormon Church or the LDS Church. It teaches that certain ordinances, baptism, confirmation, temple endowments, and external marriage are necessary for exaltation if you really

33:19 want to get to the higher points of heaven. Baptism for the dead is performed to allow deceased individuals to have the opportunity to accept the Gospel and the afterlife. All right, So now you have the role of ordinances. It's very works based, very works based. Now, the nature of Christ's atonement, The LDS Church teaches that christ atonement began the Garden of Gassinomy, where Jesus took upon himself the sins of the world, and was completed on the cross. The emphasis of the garden as a critical location for the atonement is unique to Mormon theology, all right, and doctrines and Covenant says Christ suffered for sins. Death said on me where he bled from every pore. So hey, they started in the guard where he's praying because he's bleeding, and they're like, okay, there's the first shedding of blood.

34:10 This is where the atonement begins, and it ends on the cross. Now we would disagree with that, but they are not denying blood atonement in any way. Shape or form. In fact, they're emphasizing it now. The LDS Church teaches a universal resurrection. Christ Atonement ensures that all humanity will be resurrected, regardless of belief or action. However, eternal life or exaltation, the ultimate goal of salvation and Mormonism is reserved for those who meet specific conditions faith in Christ, repentance, ordinance, and adherence to LDS teachings. Right, this obviously would go against our understanding. Now they have the doctrine of exaltation, which we would disagree. A lack of assurance of salvation we could talk about. So the point, there's many things they diverge in that we could take a part. We could criticize for this, for this, for this. It's not Christianity. Mormonism, the OLDS Church is not christian It's completely foreign to historical biblical Christianity. It's something other than I got no problem criticizing that. And we could take the doctrines and take them apart, but you got to do so in an accurate way. When it comes to the Book of Mormon, it teaches that Christ had to be a sacrifice, He had to atone for our sins. He had to be that sacrifice, and we are to put our faith in him. Now, if you just listen to that, some of that will sound well, that sounds very similar to Christianity. It does.

35:38 There's a lot of things that it says. It sounds similar. The problem is when you dig in, you're like, well, wait a minute, it means a little different. Here, means a little different here, it means a little different here. You can't just say, well, the Book of Mormon doesn't teach blood atonement. That's just a factually incorrect statement. It's an error. Now, and I told you it was going to be abbreviated. I thought I was going to go through those passages. Some of those passages I referenced multiple more than once, only just for the repetition of it, so that you'll know that they're there. Okay. So, and because I was relying on two different encounters with AI about the subject, having it trying to break it down.

36:20 But I wanted to go get the physical copy of the Book of Mormon and read from it directly so that you could see, now, some people may still not be satisfied with what the Book of Mormon is teaching. And this is where I get This is what always irritates me. Anytime a pastor says some whacked out thing about Satanism, Islam, Catholicism, Mormonism, anything, and I come and correct the whacked out part and like, no, that that's just wrong, that's just wrong. I will immediately get emails like I can't believe you're defending Satanism. I can't believe that you're a Catholic. I can't believe you're a Mormon. Can you listen to me? Correcting error does not make me a Mormon, a Satanist, a Catholic, or anything else.

37:02 It's meaning that I believe that, as Christians are, criticism of something should be based on facts and not misrepresentations, because I will defend anyone who's being misrepresented. I don't care if it's Islam. I don't care if it's Satanist, I don't care if it's atheists. I don't care whom they are. They should not be misrepresented because we should treat people with dignity and respect. And I think at the very minimum, we love our enemy enough to accurately represent them when we're going to criticize them. Doesn't mean that I believe how what Mormons teach about salvation. I don't I reject it. Don't. I'm not even saying I believe everything they say about atoat but it's very nuanced because at first you'll be like, whoa, that sounds like that sounds like Christianity. But then it's like, well, their idea is a little different than what we're saying.

37:54 They still believe in blood Atona, they still believe believe Jesus had to die. There's still parts of it. They just the atoning work before the cross, all the way in the garden. That's where they started, okay, because that's where Jesus is bleeding, and that blood is That just demonstrates why the hey, they even got that passage and we read it in the Book of Morning they who was bleeding from every pore because they stress how much blood. So don't say that there's no blood atonement in the Book of Mormon. That's just that's just not true. So what's the lesson in all of this.

38:39 I don't know if there's a good lesson in any of the other than the frustration to correct it. Right. I think that sometimes the pushback, sometimes the missiveness and the attack upon so called internet theologians, Christian podcasters, and Christian bloggers by pastors. I don't sometimes I question the motives and their attacks. They basically want to be in a position where nobody questions them, as if there's some kind of magisterial authority.

39:20 But they're not. I mean, the entire Protestant Reformation started with one man challenging the entire church. Right, Hey, you're all wrong, You're all wrong, You're all wrong, he said, while he's doing so based off the Word of God. Well, everyone thinks that they what they say. This man said things about first John chapter four in that sermon that I still don't know is even accurate. He would say it comes from the Word of God. Sermon after sermon, everyone says that they're what they're teaching is from the Word of God. But the point is that pastors don't want to be challenged by those outside, and so they kind of want to set themselves up in some form of a magisterial authority. And guess what, they also realize that and there's all these other voices it can take away from the church, right, people start listening to them, and maybe they're getting more from these people than there are from the church. So they give their money to it.

40:13 That's not good for business. I think sometimes that there's some maybe more cynical reasons. I'm not saying that pastor was doing it. It was criticizing it for that reason. I'm not saying that. I'm saying that when you hear the criticism in general, sometimes you can kind of go, well, come on now, now, are there fraudulent things said on the internet? Yes? Are there fraudulent things said in churches? How many times do we have to demonstrate how common that is? If there false. Doctrine inside the church? Yeah, is there false doctrine outside the church? Yeah? And how does it work? Especially in the Protestant world that believes in a universal body of Christ. There's the invisible universal body that all believers are a part of.

41:16 So when we talk about some people are the hands, some people are the foot? Are we only referring to that in the context of a local church? Do we believe that in reference to the entire body of Christ? Now we could get into a discussion about how do we need the and well do we need ministries to be connected to a local church? Right? Should every podcast, should ever internet theologian be connected to a local church and they be ministering under the authority of a local church.

41:59 One could our you that one could make a good argument for that. I guess you could, and I think there's been time. There's been definitely times in my Christian life I would have made a good argument for that. But if you think about it logically, well, one Luther wasn't operating under the authority of a church, and we support what he did during the Reformation, right, So okay, so we already kind of have an issue there. But not only that. If depending on your eschatology, if the church is going to get worse and worse and worse, and the church becomes a postate, won't there be a time that people will be operating outside of the church.

42:41 I'm just saying, if someone has the ability with technology to turn on a microphone and talk about biblical philological things, offer some form of biblical teaching, you could criticize it. But who says, like, where can you say, well, you can't trust any of them? Where do you say that, like somehow almost as if that's a bad thing to do? Why?

43:23 I mean, do churches have some corner on truth? And again, it's funny you criticize internet theologians while being on the internet. But they was a bit we're connected to a local church. Yeah, I still don't know who you are. I still do't know where your information comes from. I don't know anything about you. You're just another sermon on a list of thousands upon thousands upon thousands of sermons, and someone click on. They may like it. Then they may follow you and then listen to you every week, and they may never go to church. So you may become, in a sense, their internet church. Or is that a problem I get I bet you you don't have a problem. In fact, let me look here. Let me see if I can find it. I could be wrong here, I bet I could be wrong. Let me I don't want to make a claim here. Let mean, let me let me do something here. I could I could be wrong here, So just give me a second here. I don't want to I don't want to say something that's not accurate. Hang on, let me just look here. Let me give you a going Okay, Well, that's good, all right, that's good. I was checking something to see and it appears they don't have it set up that way. All right, that's a

44:56 good thing. I guess that's a good thing. I'm looking here. Maybe you can't get to it on the app. Hang on, let me let me look at something. I mean, let me look. I'm gonna verify something. Can you get to it on the app? Yeah, well, you can definitely set them as uh, you can set them as your church.

45:47 Hang on, here's all right. Yeah, I was checking something. It doesn't a They have it set up that way, which is probably good. And that's a good thing, all right, because I was about I was going to make a claim and it looks like that claim would probably not be accuracy. I had to check myself in real time. Sometimes you got to do that, right, So I was gonna I was gonna say, well, one, you can set them as your church. So I mean, they're on the internet, people, they can become their de facto, de fact or default church. That's just the case. Because you're on the internet. It doesn't appear they have a giving tab. So that's good. That's good because then they not only would they be someone would be on the internet could be a default church.

46:32 People are gonna listen to you. But then also it's set up for people to give money, so it doesn't appear they have that set up, which is a good thing. Then I mean, if you're gonna criticize this world, then the less that they are not a part of that world the best, But to be in it while criticizing it, and yet it the irony is so great in it, it's not even funny. So there you go. I don't know what to do with it. It's exhausting, is what it is. It really is. It's just exhausting. And there again, there was other claims made in it that we could go through and take apart, but that the blood atonement thing. Just come on, now, come on, now, now, where did you get that from? And remember he kept saying, you don't know where these people get their information from. He never told us where he got his information from. He didn't quote from the Book of Mormon. And again, let me make it very clear, I'm not saying that the LDS is Church, the LDS Church is teaching on the Atonement is accurate or right. I'm not saying that, just saying it's not fair to make the claim that was made.

47:47 It's inaccurate, it's false, it's demonstratably false. Now you can try to move the gold posts but they said this about the atomement. They probably said a lot of things about the Atonement, but at least the basic claim is not true. And again some of the claims were made in a speculative way by other people, and it's not official church doctrine. You do have to draw the distinction between that. Right, anybody can come along and make any claim. It doesn't make it the official teaching of a particular group. Right, we do have to draw that distinction. All right. I went longer than I wanted to. I wanted to be done seventeen minutes ago. So I think that's I hope that resolves the issue. I hope, I hope. Man.

48:35 It started out fun, ooh oh Internet theologians, This will be interesting, right, Okay, what criticism is. Going to be off? Because I pretty much had a presupposition that was going to be offered. Okay, ready to go, right, I had no idea that the irony would be. While saying that you can't trust Internet theologians because you don't know where they get their information, misinformation, all this type of thing, then in that very sermon, he would make claims without giving us where the information is coming from, and those claims at least the one that we have looked at. I'll be more dogmatic in that one was demonstratably false. I mean, the irony there, the ridiculousness of it. It's just absurd. But there we go. Now, I do understand that someone can think something and have wrong information.

49:23 He could just be mistaken. Okay, So hopefully I've not insinuated that this was done on purpose. It was done to purposely deceive. I think someone either heard something, read something, saw something, did not do due diligence, stood behind the pulpit, repeated what they assumed or heard was supposedly true, without ever really reading the Book of Mormon or digging into the claims or Brigham Young or when this was said, or doctrines and Covenants or any of the other works within Mormonism that are authoritative. And I understand anybody in the midst of preaching you can do that. I do. I Look, I almost did it myself and this message, right, I was gonna say, I was getting ready to say, well, they're on the internet, they could be people's default church, and they're not going to stop people from doing that.

50:12 And I bet you they're not going to stop people from giving So I was going to say that. So then I'm like, well, wait a minute, they may not even have it set up. And well they didn't have it set up, so see, so that would have been an inaccurate statement. See I almost did the same thing. I almost, So then the irony would be me correcting them. I would have to be corrected. See. That's the thing is, whether you're in a church not in a church. Men are fallible. So obviously you could say there was there was misunderstanding, miscommunication. You can make all the reasons for it.

50:53 That what makes it stand out is his blanket statement, don't trust these internet theologia who don't minister in a church. Don't trust him. But the implication is I can trust him while giving me misinformation. I mean, the irony there is so great. And let me make it very clear. I'll end with this, don't trust me, right, don't trust me, don't trust anyone. Question everything, Verify, Verify, Verify, verify, check check check check. The whole reason I came back tonight is because when I made those references to the Book of Mormon during the review, I didn't have the Book of Mormon in front of me, so I wanted to come back and open up the Book of Mormon so then I could try to provide verification. So I'm not, by no means I don't I'm not the magisterial authority.

51:56 I'm not the pope. I'm no authority. I'm just a sinner with mycrophone trying to figure it out. Right, I make it very clear, that's all this this podcast is about. Is about someone who's a sinner who has a microphone trying to figure out Christianity. That's what this is. I don't make it to make it out to be anything else, but it is about theology. But I'm not saying that you should agree with anything that I say. I will make forceful arguments for my position. But if you're not careful that this ideology that was kind of put forth in the message basically would lead you to just listen to people in your church and that's it, and only the people they approve of they're the authority. Sounds very Roman Catholic, but because then the assumption would be that what your church says is right and who they approve of is right.

53:04 So then you have to start with the presupposition that the church then has the authority, and it's right. You see where the problem is. The entire Protestant reforation was about saying the church is wrong, like, oh, it's just it's just such circular reasoning and maddening. But okay, all right, there we have it. Say. That's what happens when you open up the sermons two point zero app and you're like, hey, let's review a message. This will be fun, and then you find out eight hours later it's not fun anymore. I just want to go home. I quit. Who came up with this stupid idea review sermons? Oh that'll be great? Yeah, who's the idiot that came up with that idea? I'm going to find them and tell them what I fail? Oh that was me? All right.

53:56 I'm going to set aside my Book of Mormon. Hopefully we won't have to reference it any more. I'll put it over here with my Satanic Bible, okay, right, and it messed up. Sometimes you got to keep these things because you know some pastor is going to say things about them that are not accurate. Yeah that's and that kind of Yeah. What all right, thanks for listening, everyone, have a great night. I give up