Open Air Theology "Modern Mormonism"

All right, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Open Air Theology. This is a show that me and my homeboys get together and do.

My name is Jeff. I'm one of the co -hosts. I'm also one of the elders at Covenant Reformed Baptist Church in Tallahoma, Tennessee.

If you're ever in this area, we would love to have you to worship the one true God with us. Also, if you like the intro music to this show, me and my co -elder, he remastered it.

Not me. I didn't do any of that stuff. He remastered it, and a lot of people have been asking.

They would like to be able to have it whenever they want to. The single drops,

I believe, on the 22nd. Sorry, I'm going to pass it over to Brayden.

I'm going to stumble that. I am

Pastor Brayden Patterson of Well. I got so much things to talk about.

Now it's public news. I am the pastor of Valley Baptist Church in southern

Idaho. We meet on Sundays at 11 a .m. in the morning on the

Lord's Day. If you live in that area, I'd love to see you. However, on that note as well, I have been called to pastor a church in Southern California, Grace Bible Church.

It's going to be full -time ministry. It's a confessional 1689 church. Really looking forward to that.

California Kid. SoCal, as I've heard they like to call it. They meet on Sundays at 1030 a .m.

on the Lord's Day. Please, if you live in that area, it would be a great blessing if you were to go to that church.

Check it out even before my family and I get there. Love to see you in December when we do finally move.

Also, I have Reformed Ex -Mormon as a YouTube channel. Go check that out. We have a conference coming up in February.

So go look up openairtheology .com, right? No, no, openairtheologyconference .org.

Go to Jeff's Facebook. Click on the link and get yourself a ticket the next week.

openairtheology .org. On that note, after I'm done talking for five minutes,

I'll pass the mic down to – We're not doing so well tonight. We're not doing well at all. As a matter of fact, so if I'm going to be looking in the camera,

I know I'm looking at you now, but I don't see these yahoos over here. Oh, you don't see anybody? No, I see.

If I do this, but now I'm not looking through the camera because I'm on my iPad. So I'm going to do that.

I like it better when you're looking at me. I know. It's a rough day, but it was a good day, but a rough day.

I'm having technical difficulties. So I'm on my iPad. My camera's not working on my computer.

Just so I could keep on whining a little bit more, I didn't even get to hear the new song.

I didn't even hear the – No, it's the same one. It's the same one. I haven't been able to upload it yet, and I'm not going to upload it to the

Open Air Theology until it drops. Okay. Well, I still couldn't hear it, and you guys are dancing, and it's just not the same.

Because the song is something that really gets us going. The song, you know,

Jeff Rapp, everybody's going, and I got nothing. So I'm not motivated at all to do this.

And now we're talking about Mormonism. I do have, however, a Lost City Opus X cigar that I plan on smoking to the glory of God after the show.

Let's introduce myself. My name is Tom Shepherd, and I'm a member of Grace Bible Church of Bernie.

And I am the co -host of Open Air Theology. I do a

YouTube show, even if none, all about evangelism. But today we're going to be talking somewhat about evangelism today, aren't we?

Absolutely. With some Mormons. Yeah. Yeah. So I'm excited to be here.

I think your intro is longer than mine. It might have been. It's just not fair.

That's just not fair. So we are the three

Mormon rejects. Because we have facial hair.

Could you imagine? We got to talk about that real quick. Number one, we had a great graphic for the show that Braden Patterson had ready to go.

And it was all of us. It was looking good. And then he made this fake one where everybody had beards, including

Braden. Weird beard. And Jeff wasn't. I don't even have the right.

Do you have that? You have a different nose. It's horrible. It's awesome. So anyway,

Jeff messed up. By the way, I can't even see comments on this either. That's sovereignty.

That's sovereignty. That was a horrible graphic. That was one of the worst graphics that we've ever done on the show.

Let me do this here real fast. I'll show it just in case somebody doesn't have it.

Because I thought it was pretty funny. And it was just fault. It was, without a doubt.

None of Braden's. Is that showing? I got nothing. That looks good.

Look at that. That is horrible. I look like Dom DeLuise.

What is going on there? Whenever I went to get the graphic, this is the first one that popped up.

So that's what I used. I was like, well, you know, this is what he did. Oh my gosh.

My wife would divorce me if I looked like that. Look, Jeff's got a blonde beard.

That's good looking is what that is. No, that looks still Mormon with a beard is what that looks like.

Dude, your beard didn't add no weight to your chin. Like what is with the nose?

I don't know. Give me a beer without the nose. It was an AI thing. I did. It was pretty funny. All right.

Well, what are we talking about tonight? Besides talking about those Mormons, those Mormons, dim boys, dim Mormons.

They don't even like being called Mormons. So the male biases. Yeah. They really don't.

But not necessarily Mormons. We're talking about modern. Modern. I can't say the word modern.

Modern. Modern. I can't say it. Mod. Earn. Modern. And there's a few words from Pastor Jeff.

Listen, my congregation knows there's a lot of words that this just straight lingo kid cannot say.

Brayden's wanting to write a book. I mean, it was like, well, let's think of a title. He says the title and I can't even say the title.

People ask me what's in my book. I was like, ask Brayden. I can't say it. Oh, man.

The architecture of the new covenant. So we are talking about modern day

LDSs. Actually. So actually, later, later day. Latter Day Saints.

Later. Latest. It's the latest day. Latest Day Saints.

Boy, these guys just can't get it right, can they? They just keep on going latter and latter.

I don't see how we got an audience. Poor guys. Please subscribe and share this video around.

Let me just say that up front. It's going to get better. Okay. I swear here on out.

It's better now. So there are this.

This conversation really came up after several weeks ago. We talked about doing a show on this and then it was, well, we should do a show on this.

And that got precedence. And then we're like, well, let's talk about Mormonism next week. And then there was something else that popped up.

And so every Mormonism kept on getting put on the back burner. And then in that meantime,

I had the opportunity to talk with a LDS individual named Zachary Wright.

He's an LDS apologist guy. And he was bringing up things that he believes as an

LDS member that when I was LDS, I would never say. And so it really opened my eyes about how the latest day saints are evolving and they're muddying up the water even more in the process.

So would you say that they don't even agree with the church leaders of the

Latter -day Saints right now? Absolutely. Absolutely not. Yep. So does that make it harder to evangelize them?

Absolutely. You have a harder time putting a pin on what exactly they believe because it's going to change even in the middle of the conversation just so you can't actually nail them down on an actual engaging conversation.

And so, I mean, there's so many things.

So I'm going to share a screen real fast with you. I think this is kind of funny because this happened right as the show was starting.

I wanted to pull this up just to show people this. But let's do this. Bam. Bam.

So we talk about different AI programs, right?

Pastors stealing chat GPT sermons and da da da da. Well, did you know that there is a website called

LDSBot? And it's an AI apologist. LDS.

Wow. Oh, sweet. Website. So I said, what is this jank to it?

Responded. And then I called it a heretic and it didn't respond. So I don't know.

Yeah. So just I mean, you can see the type of ways that they're they're going about now being able to argue with Christians.

And so if I have an LDS person that is really wanting to have a thorough conversation with the Christian, they utilize this.

And it's a Christian that's really unknowing. You're going to be thrown with a plethora of things that you don't know how to maybe handle right off the top of your head.

So I hope that tonight we can give you some really valuable insights that hopefully will help you engage not only

Mormons, but Jehovah Witnesses and every other cult in between. Yeah.

And eventually we're going to have Jake D on here, Mr. Derringer, and we're going to interview him on Jehovah Witnesses, being that he is an ex

Jehovah Witness. Right. And he can probably give us some practical tips on how to have those conversations whenever they come knocking at your door.

Or when you see them standing in an airport by a tall box with information just with their arms crossed.

So I did want to also start with showing this real fast. So this comes right from.

So there's several places I want to go with this, like this conversation tonight. But this comes right from the dot orgs website.

So when you talk to an LDS person and you bring up things that they are unfamiliar with, or at least when

I was LDS, this was the case. If somebody had brought up something to me that I was, it sounded not right.

It sounded anti is how I would describe it. It sounded like you're trying to undermine my belief.

I would just say, well, that that's anti Mormon and that doesn't come right from the

LDS website. And so this is the LDS website on this topic right here.

This is the 13 articles of faith that they have. And these are just short statements that the church holds to.

And in Statement of Faith eight, it says, we believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.

We also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God. And so when you compare that statement right there to what

Joseph Smith claimed when he was 14 or a story he claims when he's much older than 14 years old.

But one that he says he experienced when he was 14 was that Christ appeared to him. The father in Christ appeared to him, which right there are our apologists.

Red alarm should be going off because has anyone seen the father, Jeff or Tom? No, no. But Joseph Smith says he didn't.

And he says that Jesus told him, Jesus, you've seen the father. Well, this is true.

But then he's saying two different, two different personages, right? So there's two different gods, correct? Two different beings.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. According to Mormonism. Yeah. Yeah. We'll we'll get into that too here in a moment as well.

But Jesus tells Joseph supposedly that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight.

All the Protestant believers, all the Christians in Joseph Smith's day in the 1800s, all their creeds were an abomination in sight that they drew near with their lips, but their hearts were far from him.

And so part of the creeds is chapter one, paragraph one of the 1689, which is a confession that all three of us hold to.

And it says that the word of God, the Bible, the scriptures, the 66 books are the only infallible, inspired, sufficient rule of all knowledge and saving faith.

And so the Christian saying the Bible alone is the sufficient revelation of God.

And the Book of Mormon is saying, no, no, there's more. And by putting in this word, as far as it is translated correctly, they're putting a caveat under every contentious or contradictory claim from the

Bible that proves Mormonism wrong. They can just say it wasn't translated correctly.

Gotcha. So kind of a win -win for them. Yep. Yep. It's a it's a moving of the goalposts to make it so that somebody can never score on you.

So I like even you bring up Ephesians two, eight and nine. Well, that was that was translated incorrectly.

Gotcha. You bring up Romans chapter three. Well, that was translated. Well, whatever you break out the

Greek, like if you were to just read to them the Greek. Yeah, they're they're they're not going to like it because of ultimately they think that it's been corrupted in some degree.

Has been corrupted. The manuscripts, the manuscripts. Yep. And also, even in this talk.

Go ahead. But will they pay? You know, like if you point out how the Book of Mormon has been changed.

Over the years. When you are talking to your average. I mean, the

LDS person that doesn't do a lot of doesn't have LDS bought, right? Doesn't doesn't isn't actively engaging with Christians.

That kind of LDS person isn't know any of this, but. And they think that there hasn't been any changes to the

Book of Mormon, but modern LDS apologists now are going way further, changing, changing definitions that I would have never held to.

So something that that Zachary Wright guy that he said that I would have never believed in when

I was LDS was that each one of us, you, Tom and Jeff, myself, we are all as eternal as God is that there's never been truly anything created that we've just been reshaped.

Which which also would include us being former sinners, but now achieving Godhead. Yes.

So basically, that claim would make God the father that we believe in.

He would say that that person was actually a former center. Yep. So when

I was going to a Mormon church, just for people that don't know, I for about two or three months,

I was attending a Mormon church just to find out what they believe. What I was told is that we were spiritual offsprings of heavenly fathers, how they would, you know, that that's the lingo.

So in heaven, the father had sex. Can we use that language here with Heavenly Mother and had spiritual offsprings?

So that right there eliminates us being eternal. Right. If we were in any fact created.

So so so even in their own theology, it seems to go against what

Mormons have taught. And so this is something that I was taught in 2004 ish by this.

Yeah, it is that that saying right there is completely different than anything I'd ever heard growing up as LDS.

I always had heard that we were spiritual offspring of of a heavenly father and a heavenly mother. And then that was our preexistence.

And then we came to earth to get our bodies so that then one day we could be like God, the father or heavenly father.

But now it's now it's removing that and saying, well, science says nothing has come into existence and nothing can truly be destroyed.

It's just that things change their their form. Well, that's exactly how God or our

God works is that we're all ontologically. Listen to this. We're all ontologically the same.

Just just different different stages of that sameness. Now, would would the

Mormon missionaries that that used to be the ones that are in the tie what knocking on doors?

Would they do that, too? Or is this something totally different? So something that we're going to watch here in a moment is a great brother in Christ.

His name is Aaron. And I'm going to butcher his last name. It's Aaron Shoveloff. Yeah, that is terrible.

I think that was actually. Listen, I was practicing before we got on. I think that was the closest time I've gotten to it.

It's terribly hard. It's all I've used out of Pentecostal church. He has brought to my attention.

I didn't know this was a thing. So one of the ways that why Mormonism is being changed so much is that you have these rogue people that are doing their best to be apologists for the church.

And so they're changing all these different views on things and trying to arm people with with answers that the church never officially takes.

So then they have always a cop out because they say, well, this hasn't been officially said. This is just what I it's terrible stuff.

And so the group that it's called, it's called the Calvary. It's not

Calvary is in the mountain of Calvary. Like getting on your horses and riding a

Calvary in the war, the Calvary on Facebook. And it's this missionary group that is,

I would argue, peddling this new, modern, more and more latest day saints muddying the water stuff.

And it's it's scary stuff. Now, what do the true Mormons think of these guys?

I think that. I would imagine as time goes on, they'll they'll probably be a more of official statement from the

LDS officials that just double down and say, well, if it doesn't come from us, then it's not. The church's authority or or those that are in the main church would get a prophet that would side with them just to keep that because because they hold to what the living prophets say, not necessarily what dead prophets have said.

That's right. And so is that something that Aaron in this video discuss on? Is that in the 1950s, the 1970s, we had

LDS prophets standing up and teaching X, Y or Z things behind their pulpit on general conference that now modern prophets are completely contradicting and having several teachings that are going against these things, which which one's true.

And this gentleman, his name's it's Dustin Dixon, Dustin Dixon, who's this

LDS, I would argue, in practice, an apologist here who's a part of this Calvary group is a part of Zachary Wright and Travis Anderson, I think is another name that's in there.

He's he's essentially says, well, both can be true, but they're contradictory statements and he just doesn't want to acknowledge that.

So we watch the clip here. I have a clip. So I have I have several clips here. I will say that this first one that we show does have a curse word in it at the very real quick.

Can I ask this much, Michelle, a question? Michelle, what is GTSY? She says, hey, oh, hey,

GTSY sister. It's good. It's good to see you, Jeff. Oh, OK.

Oh, listen, I, I, I'm just not with the time.

You know what I'm saying? Yeah. Jeff, you just L .O .L. I'm just not with it.

Right. I mean, I'm I'm I'm 44 years old, OK? I mean, I'm not a young buck no more.

I get up in the middle of the night to pee five times and hurt myself twice. All right, we'll put this up.

Sorry. Listen, this is a different kind of show, OK? This is a different show.

Yeah. And to answer Bruce, he asked, do we only do videos? We would do a podcast to see our ugly faces.

And what fun would that be? Yeah, we will one day, hopefully, Lord. Yeah. And just to figure it out, we're a bunch of dumbos.

Before I play this video, I do want to just show. And the only reason I show this is not as this is a form of showing authority.

But this was this was my quad when I was LDS. Explain to them what a quad is.

It's the Book of Mormon, the Bible, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price all bound together in one one go with it.

But I just want to let you know that I was very much an LDS member. And so I'm speaking from experience and a what used to be a testimony on these things.

And I'm telling you, when I was growing up, this is a completely different form of Mormonism now. And it's dangerous.

And so I hope that this is a blessing to everybody that watches. So but on that note, we're going to watch just the first two minutes here of this.

Does have a curse word in it. So if you don't want to hear the S -word said, skip for a couple minutes.

But here it is. Oh, just toughen up. Yeah, just toughen up. It's almost like Johnny Cash flipping somebody off.

Yeah. That's controversial. Let's keep on going. Yeah, it's like my ability to choose good and wrong.

My ability to like do works of good or works of evil. Yeah, but we would define that as a moral public.

Yeah. So yeah, not having a premortal life would pose a big problem. How so?

Well, if I was created from nothing. Right. And then God's infinite foreknowledge already knew what place he's going to put me in.

What decisions I'd make. Even what circumstances. That's a pretty standard Latter -day Saint view, though.

No, it's not, actually. Most Latter -day Saints we've talked to believe in divine, definite foreknowledge. I don't really give a shit what those

Latter -day Saints have to say. But thank you. It doesn't matter to me. Most of your leaders, though, have taught that God knows the definite future.

When they've spoken on the issue. Yeah, but you know the story of Osler and Maxwell. You told me it.

You recounted it to me before. Where Blake Osler corrects Neal and Maxwell on timelessness. And he agrees with them on this point.

I don't know what the outcome was. But the dominant position of historic

Latter -day Saint theology is that God knows the definite future. Okay, that's the dominant position for just traditional

Christianity in general. I would expect those Protestant presuppositions to be within Christendom in general.

People haven't really given it much thought in Latter -day Saint dialogue. But your leaders have taught that God knows the definite future.

I think that the Bible teaches that. That presupposing a problem, that's why I brought it up, with agency.

And it also contradicts to a lot of the prophecies in the Bible, if that's true. I don't think your leaders think that's true.

Okay, I was just appealing to your authority, right? My authority? No, no, no. The Bible would disagree with that.

Oh, you're talking about the objective authority. The Bible teaches that. The Bible holds that God knows the definite future.

I would say some verses in the Bible indicate that. Let me pause here. I hope you guys heard that.

This Dustin gentleman said, there is no objective authority.

And that was in response to Aaron saying, the Bible is the objective authority.

So that's my question, too. So Aaron is assuming that this guy is going to represent normal Mormon beliefs at first.

Great question. So let me be up front and tell us a couple of these things. So this is a two -hour long video that Aaron does.

Let me also say Aaron does a fantastic job in this video. And even in areas where we would say, well, maybe we could have said this,

I would be doing the same thing if I was watching one of my evangelism videos. I'd be like, man, I wish I would have done this instead of this.

Right. And so I know I know that Aaron is getting a lot of slack regarding people saying, well, why are you casting pearls before swine?

This guy doesn't want to hear the gospel. Why did you waste two hours of your time on him? Listen, we all get led in different ways when we're doing evangelism to try to talk to people in different ways.

And sometimes we immediately shut down conversations. Sometimes we keep on having those conversations. And one of the fruits of this conversation, listen to me.

One of the fruits of this conversation is the fact that everyone now can watch what more modern apologetics looks like.

We can all take notes and we can all put these things in our tool belt to be able to evangelize to LDS people.

But one thing I would say that I do think here going forward, you see that Dustin is having the presupposition that there is no objective reality.

There's no objective truth. So therefore, everything he argues for is 100 percent subjective.

Aaron is trying his best to point himself, point Dustin to the word of God that shows objective truths within it.

The Bible tells us that the natural man will not accept the things of God, that we are enemies of God.

All those Bible verses that tell us a presupposition that we have as believers towards unbelievers.

Right. When I was LDS for those 19 years, I would have thought that I could understand the things of God.

And it was revealed to me personally and through feelings and burnings in the bosom and all these kind of things.

However, it wasn't until God opened my eyes and did something to me that his objective truth was made so bright and clear.

I could no longer rejected his objective truth. And so Dustin in this video, the

LDS individual, he's not going to accept these things. And he even admits it in the video, unless the

Lord is kind to him and opens his eyes and changes his heart, which is the prayer. So we would say the natural man receives not the things of the spirit because he spiritually discerned.

Right. That's right. It's foolishness unto him of this entire conversation. So the things that he's trying to communicate to him are right over his head.

He's trying. Absolutely. Yeah, absolutely. Listen, this is something I noticed with it, which

Tom, I sent you the voice messages of this as we sat and listened to it and for accountability and whatnot.

That Zachary Wright gentleman, I want to get your opinion on what you thought of what he was saying as somebody who never broke his

LDS. What did you think of him and what did you think of my interaction with him? So he was trying to put yourself, well, number one, he was just trying to twist everything.

Every single thing that you brought up to him, he went to something else. As soon as he knew he was wrong, he would go into, well, what about this?

He would never address any of the issues that you brought up. Because he knew he was trapped.

So, I mean, it was almost like he was trying to spin everything that you said to him and going on to another issue.

In other words, he would spin 10 different opinions saying everything was subjective and that none of the things that you were saying were.

So he was just trying to spin the conversation constantly. Yeah. So he wasn't interested in knowing the truth.

He was putting himself on the same level ground as you were. Yet he had no standard by which to stand on.

And you were telling him the standard is the scriptures. The standard are the 66 books of the

Bible. This is what it says. But he wouldn't accept any of it. He wouldn't accept any of the truth.

He was just argumentative. Absolutely. Yeah, I would agree with you on that.

And I think so what we see in those voice messages from Zachary is the exact same type of argumentation that this

Dustin gentleman is doing in here. He's coming at it with an attitude of arrogance and pride.

And this guy, he actually admits it. He says, I am arrogant. At one point in this video, he says, I am arrogant.

Something that, you know, something that I would just say to Michelle, too.

So she just brought up something about Isaiah with God's word doesn't return void. Amen to that. We're dealing with men.

Listen, let me let me show you this real fast. I'll put this up on the screen and I can bring back this here in a second.

But let me share screen on this. This is

I don't know if we'll be able to see this or not. Oh, yeah, we will. So this is just one of the messages that was sent by this gentleman to myself.

He says in here. So he brings up Isaiah.

So that's the reason I want to bring this up, Michelle. Your comments about Isaiah actually verify my point about you ultimately holding to a subjective standard.

We can't objectively prove that Isaiah wrote all of Isaiah because we can't find any manuscripts that date that far back.

That would be objective. And we just don't have that.

So you are imposing your subjective opinions into the text to arrive at your conclusion. However, one thing that I bring out to him is how does

Jesus treat the words of Isaiah? He quotes them and he treats them as historical facts.

And Isaiah is prophesying about a thing in the future that according to Isaiah chapter 44 to 46. He says, I will tell you these things before they happen so that you may know that I am

God and there's none other that there's none before nor after me. So God himself speaks.

I tell you future events to let you know that I am God and that this was true, that I prepared this beforehand so that you would know that I'm the only

God. And what Zachary is doing and what Dustin is doing in these videos is no better than the atheist that's trying to take the modern textual criticism approach of trying to disprove every book of the

Bible so that then you don't have any objective reality. You have no objective truth. So Georgia just asked the question, do you think that these cults are...

Let me read that again on mine. Do you think that all of these are just false teachings that are cultivating a secular belief in their religion?

In my opinion, they're basically trying to conjure up a

God of their own understanding that's going to suit them. Whatever God that they want to follow, that's going to be the one that they're going to follow, a

God that they've made up in their own mind. Amen. That is for sure, right?

And that's what we expect from people who are dead in their sins. Absolutely. That follow after the imaginations of their mind, right?

One that's not going to punish me according to my sin, that I need to forgive myself.

I'm accepted by everything. Just a God that's going to suit us. And that's what all idolatry is.

We're our own God. And so the question I kept on trying to hound to Zachary, which this gentleman, I know

I haven't shown you everything and a lot of it was through voice messages. But one thing that he never did was answer my question of how do you believe?

Why do you believe in what you believe in? And he didn't want to answer it because I would assume, and this would be the reason why

I wouldn't want to answer it as an LDS individual, previous LDS individual, was because you have to admit

I got a good feeling about it. It's based on my opinion rather than something other than my opinion.

And listen, let me ask you guys this, Jeff. If let's say

I was wanting to argue with you, debate you on whatever topic it was, but I didn't believe in the laws of logic.

I said I was a purple cow and you can't convince me any other reason.

And all the other cows in this world are really chickens. And all chickens are really just fire engines.

How are you going to debate me on anything? You can't.

You don't have an objective reality to hold to someone to. That's the importance of knowing the laws of logic and understanding presuppositional apologetics in some in some basic understanding.

Right. I've had a conversation with one. They spoke about the testimony and the burning in the buzz.

And I just said, yeah, man, I've had gas before, too. That's right.

I love it. Yeah. And that's really the issue is that we are going with the presupposition that God's word is final authority.

There's absolute authority in God's word and that we must submit to that word.

If John Stott said we cannot agree on anything unless we first agree how to agree.

So what's the standard of our belief? And so what do we do, Braden, when a guy just keeps on going now spinning and spinning and spinning?

My opinion is that we go right back to the hard issue. What's the gospel?

That's right. Yeah. That's right. I think every conversation. Listen, and this goes for old what my experience of LDS individuals were and even what

LDS people of today are modern LDS people. The latest day saints. And that is you need to tell them about Jesus.

You can try to bring up different Joseph Smith history, Brigham Young history. Look, I got a quote right here.

That's real easy to show craziness of Joseph Smith. He he says in here,

I was reading it to Jeff earlier. It says. Yeah.

So it's it's in the journal discourses. It's in volume six. This is produced by the LDS church, which they reject now as doctrine.

That's you can find that on their LDS website. But this was preached by Joseph Smith. He says this.

It is necessary that we should understand the character and being of God and how he came to be. So for I'm going to tell you how

God came to be God. We haven't imagined and suppose that God was God from all eternity.

I will refute that idea and will take away and do away with the veil so that you may see.

Okay. He says in the following page here, then, is eternal life to know the only wise and true

God and how you have got to learn how to be gods yourselves and to be kings and priests to God.

The same as all gods have done before you that that's the founding of Mormonism is wanting to become your own

God. Yeah. And listen, that's the reason why

Joseph Smith talks about not wanting to believe in the confessions, because the confessions are very clear about this, that there's only one

God from all eternity to eternity, because God's word that is inspired, infallible, inerrant and sufficient tells us that there's only one

God from all eternity to eternity. That's right. I do.

I, you know, one of the questions that that was asked that you put up on the screen just a little bit ago. Yes, they are.

They are starting to use secular reasoning to influence their beliefs big time, big time.

So I do have I do have another minute marker here. If you want to put this one up on the screen, Jeff, check this out, guys.

And why should we assume that being God does means that they can't sin? I don't know.

What is it? What are you talking about? The Bible doesn't speak the same way about David as it does about God. No, it's there's only it only says that it only says of God.

Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is this to come? No one's described that way other than God.

So when the Bible talks, when it was a psalm that was read to the Davidic kings, calling them Elohim, right?

What are you thinking of? Sorry. So when the Bible and the Psalms. Which Psalm are you thinking of? I can find it for you.

Just as a courtesy, we are mic'd up right now. Psalm 45, 67. That's fine. Psalm 45, 67.

Want to read it? Yeah, sure. Thy throne,

O God, is forever and ever. Thy scepter of thy kingdom is a right scepter.

Thou lovest righteousness and hatest wickedness. Therefore, God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

This was specifically the psalm written to the Davidic kings. That's what they called them, okay? And so when the author of Hebrews uses it in reference to Jesus Christ and God the

Father, that is exactly what you were just asking me. When is the

Davidic king ever equated the same way as God is equated? Right here in Psalms and right here in Hebrews.

So in the history, in the Christian tradition, reading that. Hold on. I would recommend not following the rhetorical patterns of Travis Anderson here.

I don't know what you're talking about. You learned this from Travis Anderson. Well, maybe the community that you're in has a style of rhetorical aggression that doesn't allow for complete thoughts.

I would feel the same way about probably all of traditional Christian theology.

That's just a subjective claim. Your opinion is up there. I'm talking about the mode of speech and interfaith dialogue.

I think there's a little bit of a threshold of interruption where there's a kind of excited back and forth.

But we should allow each other to finish most thoughts. Unless I'm going on and on and on.

But in the Christian tradition, when we read such passages, the idea is that David is a type of Christ to come.

That there are certain things said of David that are more true of Christ than they are of David. That they are exemplified in Christ in the way that they're not exemplified in David.

So you're saying that there's scriptures that talk about David the same way they talk about Christ.

Of Moses, Abraham, Joshua. So that's the contradiction you were telling me before. Because you just originally said the opposite.

No, that the things that are true of these typological figures are pointing to something that's crystallized in the person of Jesus.

That is even more true of Jesus than it is of these sinful figures. What do you guys think of that?

So what's the guy's name who's doing the Christian guy's name again?

The Christian guy, his name is Aaron. So Aaron, number one,

I think he's doing a great job. He's absolutely talking about what the truth is. That there are typological figures in the scriptures that is pointing to Christ.

The issue with that, and I don't mean to be dogging him at all. I'm not.

He's speaking truth. But this is something that even

Christians have a hard time understanding. That this guy is just not—I wouldn't even go there.

I mean, there's just no way he's going to be able to understand what the

Bible is pointing to. But I do know, to be fair, in minute 20, when you get there, he starts talking about who

God is. And then the other guy is trying to make his argument why God wasn't a sinner in the past.

So he eventually gets there, but in case anybody's looking at this saying, why is he even discussing this about it?

Well, eventually he does get there. You want to bring that up? Yeah, let's hear it. I'll play it right here, minute 20.

But that was your question, right? Because that was the criteria for what an Elohim is. That's what we were originally talking about.

I think maybe my point was there's certain superlative, extreme, categorically unique statements about God that are not made of David, are not made of any other figure.

So, for example, holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty who was and is and is to come.

There's no other figure in the Bible spoken of like that. Nobody even comes close or even possibly close to that.

And so, back to what we were originally talking about. You're saying that those verses teach that to be a Christian it's required that you believe that God was not a sinner.

Well, I'm making the observation there has never been a Christian that has believed God may be sinned.

Per your criteria of Christian, sure. The historic Christian position. Okay. That's unanimous.

For the criteria of the Bible, like what is the criteria to be a Christian from the Bible? To believe in the

Lord Jesus Christ substantially and not merely superficially. Okay, so what does that mean? Substantially, not superficially? To repent and not be an idolater, but to look to God as the most high

God. Okay, so in the past thought that God was a sinner. Is that not what they're… Could they not fit under that criteria?

That would be idolatry. It would not be the same God. So, then I asked you where in the Bible that that doctrine is contained, right?

Revelation 4, 8. So, it says like it doesn't say that God was never a sinner. It says that He was holy, right? Holy, holy, holy is the

Lord God Almighty who… They were commanded to be holy in Leviticus. Right. So, we're even supposed to be that way.

Can you see though the difference? Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty who was and is and is to come.

That's not true of you. That's right. Boom, mic drop right there. Right.

So, correct me if I'm wrong, Bray. The other dude is trying to make the argument that God was formerly a sinner.

And the reason why he's doing that is because of the Mormon beliefs that they believe that as a sinner at one point, by grace, somehow they were saved and they can achieve

Godhead. They believe that God was once a man. And so, if God was once a man, that would include

Him being a sinner. Listen, this comes from the words of Brigham Young again. This is sometimes accepted and sometimes not depending on the group of LDS that you're talking to.

Because again, it's all based off of subjective how I want to feel about the opinion at the time. But in the journal

Discourses again, this is Brigham Young during a message. He says, So, he's referring to another person who's

LDS who is not teaching what he's going to say right here. So, right there, that should throw some, like, how does that work if both are inspired of God?

But still, we'll keep on going. It says this, But the

God that I serve is progressing eternally, and so are all

His children. They will increase to all eternity if they are faithful. So, right, listen, they believe that the

Father, depending again on the LDS person, if they are just this LDS saying that we're all eternal ontologically beings, that we've never come into existence, but we've always, listen, that's just weird to think about, right?

That statement of God, I am that I am. If we're wanting to say we're of ontologically the same makeup, can any of us say

I am that I am? Absolutely not. And so, Brigham Young is arguing, and what this gentleman is arguing for is that the

Father was able to increase, and He's still increasing today, which is completely different than the immutability doctrine of Christians.

Yeah, what do you do if I am the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow? I mean, what do they do with those verses?

They would say, just because of plastic, so listen here, plastic cup was something else prior.

It just has changed a little bit, and you see, they would try to throw something out there like, well, did

Jesus change when He became flesh, or did Jesus go through puberty, or did He turn 29 to 30 years old, like things along those lines, which we know as Christians and as evangelists.

Well, when He became flesh, God took on humanity. That's right, and that right there is falsely understanding the hypostatic union.

The nature of God never changed, but part of the nature of man is that you grow old, and you do change throughout time.

So there's some things going on there, but that's just this type of argument and reasoning that tries to make the

LDS sound right and whatnot. So one thing I hope that this proves to everybody that's listening to this is that LDS are dangerous, and they're educated on this matter right now.

So given this, you're going here that you're trying to achieve

Godhead. I mean, do you go to just the Scripture when you— that, listen, if God was a sinner, if Christ was a sinner,

He's not qualified to die on the cross to pay for your sin. He's not qualified as a sinner to be able to pay the penalty for your sin because He would have to die for His own.

Well, they're not covenant theologians. And they're also saying that Jesus—they would say that Jesus didn't sin.

They would say Jesus was perfect and didn't sin. Oh, so the

Father sinned, but Jesus— Yep. Really?

So they've been making— So one of the things is that Joseph Smith, in one section that I should have read for you right there,

Joseph Smith seems to admit that the Father was the Savior of His earth, of His world, whatever world that was called, that He was that to that one.

However, that— He could save that world as a sinner. But He creates a world for His Son to save them, but He could not be a sinner.

Yeah, yeah. One of those things with—it's crazy stuff. And I would say that not all

LDS believe this by any means. I think this is just them throwing something out there saying, well, you see,

David was a sinner, but yet David is called Elohim from Psalm 45.

So why couldn't the Father? It's not admitting that He was a sinner. It's saying He could have been and not violated the term

God. So here's the issue. Here's the issue. So I'm not saying—in the Orthodox Christian faith,

Christianity, there are beliefs that we can differ over and still remain a

Christian. But there are certain things, core issues, the doctrine of God, the doctrine of the

Trinity, justification by grace alone through faith alone. Essentials of the faith. Yeah, it cannot be messed with.

And if you mess with it, you're not a Christian. What are those essentials in the

Mormon church? Because it sounds like you can just pitter -patter all you want to with their view of God.

Yeah, what are the core doctrines? Like for someone to claim to be a

Mormon— Listen, this is the moving of the goalposts that I'm talking about with this.

I'm going to change the definition to fit whatever I want it to fit at the time according to these LDS people. I would argue that in order to be considered

LDS, it would be a person that holds to the 13 articles of faith that we looked at earlier, one of those being that the

Bible is the word of God as far as it's translated correctly, but we also believe that the Book of Mormon is the word of God.

There's several other statements of faith in there that you too would have to believe in. Second, you would have to believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet who received priesthood authority, which is completely different than the biblical propositions of what the priesthood was and is.

But that Joseph Smith was a prophet, that there's a modern prophet today, and that you've been baptized into the church.

Who's the modern prophet today? It's—oh, gosh dang it, of course you'd have to ask that.

It used to be Thomas Thomas. Would the modern prophet be the president? Yes, yeah, they call it the president of the church.

Yeah, so whenever I was going to that Mormon church, it was Gordon B. Hinckley. It was, yeah. It's Russell M.

Nelson. I can't believe I didn't remember that. But yeah, it used to be Gordon B. Hinckley. That's what I grew up with too, Jeff. Then it became

Thomas S. Monson, and now it's Russell M. Nelson. Just one step closer to God then, right?

Godhood. One step closer to Godhood, yep, and their eternal progression. So you can manipulate the doctrine of God all you want, but just don't manipulate the doctrine of Joseph Smith.

I would agree with that. That's one of the things. Listen, so this is something that I brought up with that conversation

I had with Zachary, right? At one point in the conversation, I said, look, how would you like it if I claimed to be

LDS and I went to each one of my neighbors and told them I am a Mormon, but I reject

Joseph Smith, I reject the Book of Mormon, I reject baptism and priesthood authority and temples and so on and so forth.

I reject it all and I tell them I'm LDS and I'm speaking as an LDS person to you and I represent

LDS doctrines. How would you like it? And every time I've had a conversation with a missionary in person, they always say, well, no, you can't claim that.

You got to wear your white undies. Right? And I look at them and I say, listen, you can't claim to be a

Christian for the exact same reason I can't claim to be a Mormon. Because definitions matter.

And so with this Zachary Wright gentleman, I kept on pointing him to what the historical and biblical essentials of the

Christian faith are, which is when Christ says you must do believe X and where you'll receive

Y like John 8. Unless you believe I am, you shall die in your sins. If someone doesn't believe in Jesus Christ as the

Eagle Amy that I am, you will die in your sins. That's a promise from Jesus.

That's an essential of Christianity. You cannot be a Christian and deny the fact that Jesus Christ is the I am. However, that's a great flip, by the way.

I mean, that that's you're flipping their own their own thing. Absolutely. Yeah, that's great.

He then argued with me that I was being responsible for the true Scotsman fallacy, which is the fallacy that says, well, no true

Scotsman would eat porridge with honey because you have to eat it with peanut butter.

Whatever the example is, the issue with that is that is not a true Scotsman's fallacy, because in order for a true

Scotsman fallacy to be a fallacy is you have to have an objective standard of what makes a true

Scotsman a Scotsman in the right place. Yeah, they don't have that. They don't.

So listen, this is this is where a lot this is where presuppositional apologetics and really logically thinking through these kind of things can really help you.

Because if you were accused today, well, you're just you're you're making things up so that you can claim the title of Christianity.

But I can't. Well, no, the Bible is coherent together and it tells us the definitions.

It tells us what the true Scotsman is, what the true Christian is. Right. You're just not meeting those standards.

And then they would go right into, well, you know, we have the Bible, too. As far as it can be translated correctly.

Yeah. But again, like that's craziness. So what happened?

I don't know. Do you guys hear that? No. What? Oh, an ad popped up on one of my other screens.

I was like, what is that? It was some Joseph Smith coming to get you.

That's right. So there is one thing I did want to show, show people this. If you wouldn't mind pulling up this screen, something that the

Zachary Wright gentleman did that. I think this is where I if I had the opportunity to talk to Dustin in that conversation, there there are times where men are called

Elohims in the Old Testament. There's. Hey, I just share two pictures to our

Facebook chat. I mean, our group messenger at the very end. Could you pull those up whenever we're done?

OK, I should be able to do that. I should be able to do that. Remind me if we need to start doing that.

Yes, we do. But however, so one thing that I took Zachary right to which he just couldn't comprehend this, which, again,

I think that goes to show that this is the things of God are folly to those that are unconverted.

Right. But Philippians two. So he's he referenced Philippians two.

So, again, how can an LDS person reference anything in the Bible if it's not the objective standard?

Exactly. They can't. They just can't. They can't. It is.

But he said in Philippians two that it's Jesus. So whenever we see

Jesus being worshiped, because that was one of my arguments, was that Jesus is worshiped. God's only one that receives worship. So therefore,

Jesus is God and flesh worthy of worship, unlike other humans. Right.

No other humans worthy of worship. And he said, well, no, Jesus receives worship, but he gives it to the father.

It's he's working as a mediator for us to worship the father, not him, which goes against exactly the words that it says that they worship

Jesus. But regardless of that. So he referenced Philippians two, which has nothing to do with the son giving worship to the father.

It's only to the glory of the father. That's right. So listen to this.

Verse four of verse five and on is what exactly brought up and I'll read it. It says, have this mind among yourself, which was also in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God, a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, found in human form.

He humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore, God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name so that the name of Jesus, every bow in heaven and on earth and under the earth and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is the

Lord to the glory of God, the father. Now, listen to this.

Jesus, who existed in the form of God. When he becomes in the form of man, where was the father at during this time?

He was sitting on the throne receiving worship from angels. He was hearing glory, glory, glory, right?

Where, where, where was Jesus at the one who is also

God that is worthy of all that worship? Where is he on earth? He's on earth here in crucify, crucify away with him away with him.

That's the humility that's being talked about in here is that Jesus Christ, who was in as who was in the form of human was also

God in flesh. And that's why it's talking about humility. Have this attitude in yourself.

However, that's not the point that I took that. So Zachary references first. I loved it that he brought it in here because this verse right here unequivocally approves.

Approve. What is the word approves? Demonstrates whatever you want to say.

Demonstrates to us the deity of Christ here in verse nine and on.

It says, therefore, God has exalted to him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name so that the name of Jesus, every knee should bow in heaven on earth.

And every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God, the father. That is a quotation from somewhere in the

Old Testament. It is a quotation from Isaiah somewhere in 44 to 46.

Don't don't. I can't. I can't remember off the top of my head exactly where it is. Don't don't stone me, please. But Isaiah says that at the name of Yahweh, every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Yahweh is

Lord. You see what I'm saying? So what is Paul done in here? He says at the name of Jesus.

So Jesus connects Yahweh, the one and only God that there's none before, nor after, nor like Jesus.

And so, yeah, there are times where men are called

Elohim. There is not a single time that another man in the Old Testament is called Yahweh. Amen.

In fact, that's the whole reason that the Jews crucified Christ, because he, being a man, made himself out to be

God. He, being a man, made himself out to be the son of God. And he himself made himself out to be equal to God.

The three accusations of why they try to kill him and stone him. And each time it comes after he claims that he is the great

I am. That's right. His deity, Yahweh, the one and only

God. Yeah, that's right. That's right. Yeah.

So I, yeah, it's, it's crazy. I was 23. Read it.

Send it. That's it. You know,

I actually reference this Philippians 2, 5 to 11 today.

I don't even know what I'm doing, man. I'm over here looking in Ezekiel. All right.

What I say? Forty five. Twenty three. Yes, sir. Okay, here we go.

Okay, yeah. It says about myself. I have sworn from my mouth has gone out in righteousness.

A word that shall not return to me. Every knee shall bow.

Every tongue shall swear allegiance only in the

Lord. Capital Lord, which is Yahweh. It shall be said of me.

All righteousness and strength to him shall come and be ashamed.

All who were increased in again. Increase against him.

And the Lord. Capital Rd. Yahweh. All the offspring of Israel shall be justified and shall glory.

Then the very first few verses of 46. It says that bell will bow down and never will stoop over.

Speaking about the false gods of Babylon. They will bow their knee to the name of Yahweh.

And then you go to Philippians 2. Listen, LDS, Dustin, Zachary, any other

LDS person that might watch this. You will either have your knee bowed one day under the wrath of God.

Or today is the day to bow it to the Lord Jesus Christ. That's right. Hey, I think that Aaron guy is watching.

Yeah, he is. Yep. So I do have another spot up here. We can watch if we want.

Let me. I haven't presented it to you. Huh? My fault. My fault. I get passionate about this stuff, guys.

So I hope. It's received well. This is it.

Holy. Who was and isn't is to come. Those. Hold on. Hold on.

Hold on. Hold on. You have your own as well. Let me ask you a question. I'm just asking you a verse like Revelation for as previously quoted.

If I understand you correctly. That does not suffice to establish that God never sent.

Is that fair? I'm just. I'm just trying to understand. It doesn't matter if it's under mine or your theology. That verse does not suffice to say that God was never a sinner, period.

Under any sort of theology. On the book of Revelation alone. I don't. Do you think that the

Bible is sufficient to make a case that Heavenly Father never was a sinful mortal? No. That's that was my whole point.

No. Okay. That's why I was asking you about that. Okay. So. That's why I asked you why it was a criteria for someone to be a true

Christian. They have to believe that God would never have said it. Yeah. That's built into the very definition of.

I mean the father. The person of the father. Of all three persons of the Trinity. The Trinity is not in the

Bible. So, again, we can. Like. Wow. I'm asking about typically God the father.

We can formulate the Trinity if you want to. But it's not. The two. Formulate. Hero Israel.

The Lord our God. The Lord is one. And then. And then sort of the creed or the confession.

Jesus is Lord. To say that God is one. So, what does God is one mean?

To say that God is one. What does that mean? To say that God is one. I don't want to build off their false position.

I want to understand what God is one. So, I hope you guys are seeing. Listen to how this gentleman

Dustin is not wanting to hear the actual argument. And he's just wanting to go off on this rabbit trail.

Let's chase this other thing. Let's chase this other thing. Let's chase this other thing. Instead of letting Aaron, rightly so, get out the biblical view of this.

Let's just stop it and cut it short and chase something else. So, is Dustin claiming that God was a sinner and he's no longer a sinner?

That he's now holy? Is that what he's claiming? Dustin's argument, if I'm not mistaken, he's saying that the

Bible is not sufficient at teaching us that the Father never sinned.

And I don't think Dustin believes that he ever sinned. I think he's just saying that the

Bible isn't sufficient at making that case. Wow. He's saying that you need modern prophets for that.

Yeah, to be a Christian. Yeah, so he said that it doesn't prove that the

Father didn't sin. So, what is the criteria for being a Christian? Again, and you said that Mormonism does teach that Jesus never sinned, but the

Father did. I think it leaves it open for interpretation. Especially because the

LDS in modern times haven't continued to talk openly about it. It's not with clarity that you could say one way or the other according to the

LDS. But it is clear to say that God is not Trinitarian as Dustin said. Oh yeah, Dustin and all

LDS people would say that there's a plurality of gods within the Godhead. That the Deuteronomy 6 .4

is more or less the way that I would have argued it was that the Father is a

God, the Son is a God, and the Spirit is a God. And they're one in purpose. Yep.

Wow. Um, this though I think is pretty interesting.

There's two other spots. There's three other spots I want to show, so I'll be quick and show on this. Oh, clicked off a bit.

The interpretation of Scripture by your prophets and apostles matter to you. Yes. Yes.

Okay, so if you believe that it says one thing, but your prophets and apostles have interpreted it to mean something else, does that have any bearing on you?

Yes. Okay. Yes. Good. Yeah. I can give an example. Ezekiel 37 has been interpreted by, to this day, as in the

Preach My Gospel manual, suggesting that the prophecy about the two nations gathering is about the

Book of Mormon and the Bible together. Okay? When I read that, and I'm taking my

LDS presuppositions out of it, I see it as about the two nations of Israel and the restoration of the nations of Israel going back into being one instead of Judah and Israel together, right?

Both and or either or for you. So that's what I was getting at. Why can't

I be both? Why can't I agree and respect and fear the interpretations of my

Latter -day Saint apostles and also say that this is about the nations of Israel?

Why can't I have my take and eat it too? Did you guys catch what he's getting at with that?

Yeah, right, right. Saying just because something is LDS doctrine official that has been taught and proclaimed, and LDS little kids are learning this right now, just because that's the case doesn't mean that it's necessarily true.

In other words, your interpretation of the truth is your truth, and my interpretation of the truth is my truth, and we can just agree to disagree and keep on going on living peacefully.

That's right. That's right. I couldn't help but notice, Aaron, if you're still on, brother, what kind of Bible is that?

It looks like a nice Bible. Oh, what Bible he's got there. Yeah, yeah.

Will you hold him, bruh? What Bible do you think it is, Jeff? I couldn't hardly see it the way he was moving it, but it looked like a nice Bible.

Of course. Sorry. I'm a Bible enthusiast.

If you haven't gotten a post -Hennebert's Lux Bible rebind yet. ESV creasing confessions, he says.

Oh. You might need to get yourself a PTL post -Hennebert's Lux Jeffrey Rice special.

This guy is the best Bible. Go grab your belt. Go grab your world champion Bible rebind. I do got a belt, don't

I? I try not to boast.

Where's my belt? Hey, Aaron, man, I mean, seriously, what a great job you did with this young man.

I don't think I've been able to stand up there with him that long.

I was just, you know what, I've had enough. Good patience there. Good job.

Let me just say, Jeff's Bible, if you buy a Bible from Jeff, it will last you, your kid's lifetime.

They'll have the same Bible as you. That's right. The quality is unbeatable. Look at that.

There's the Bible belt. Wow, that is fantastic. Just wear that the rest of the night, dude.

Love it. All right, listen to this now. BYU professors can see more than Latter -day

Saint prophets and apostles? They think that sometimes. Yeah, you're missing the point where the

Latter -day Saint prophets and apostles are theologians. They interpret

Scripture publicly for the church. So they're not theologians. They're not philosophers. They're not really studying those arts, unless their field specifically before their calling was in those arts, maybe like a little bit like Jeffrey R.

Holland. And so when the church has people who write books for Deseret, for scholars like that, it is explicitly their job to go into the history, to do like things like the

Joseph and Faber's Project, and to interpret history and have a more accurate representation of history.

That is explicitly not the prophets and apostles' job. It's just explicitly not. To interpret

Scripture. That's not what I said. I said to go into the Joseph Smith papers and interpret history and see like who taught what when and all this stuff.

That's explicitly not their job. That's not what they're claiming to do. How are you linking that with stuff like 2

Nephi 25 -23? Because it's not their job to study the English language enough to understand that the word after and the way that it was used at that time when the

Book of Mormon was translated could have meant despite. It is their job to proclaim the doctrine of the church.

That is their job. Right. So as they're doing that, they're interpreting Scripture. Right. Yeah.

So when they get up before millions of people in the general conference pulpit and they interpret a passage like 2

Nephi 25 -23, after all we can do, they have a responsibility. I hope you'd agree to do responsible interpretation and responsible exegesis at some basic level.

No. Before they get up as apostles. Responsible exegesis? No, that's not at all what like Matthew was doing. No. What are you talking about responsible?

Do LDS prophets and apostles have a responsibility to responsibly exegete

LDS canon from the pulpit of general conference? I would say no. I don't think they have any training in exegesis.

Why would I expect them to give perfect exegesis when they use LDS Scripture? How do you communicate truth?

Should Latter -day Saints be able to trust Latter -day Saint prophets and apostles to publicly interpret

Scripture over the church? Yes. Do you trust the LDS prophets and apostles from the 1950s to the 1990s to interpret 2

Nephi 25 -23? I do trust them and respect their interpretations. Okay. And I would respect them so much to claim that they're even inspired.

Okay. Guys, I can't watch this again. Seriously, I don't know what he believes.

I have no clue. He don't know what he believes. He's just making it up as he goes.

I mean, I would like him to write down on a piece of paper, this is what I believe. And I'll even start with you there.

Let's just go here and now let's compare it with the Bible. It's just crazy stuff.

Listen, if Dustin sees this, you are formally invited to come on to Open Air Theology and have a conversation with us.

Yeah. Zachary, right. You are formally invited to come on here and have a conversation with the three of us.

I might have to plug my earphones just saying. Now, this is the sad part, guys.

Let's listen to this real fast. Yeah. This is where let me be really like.

Hold on. Let me clear something up real quick. They're talking about my Bibles. So it cost me one hundred and twenty five dollars in material costs to make a

Bible. And if I buy the Bible, I buy a nice Bible. So like those

LSBs, I spent seventy dollars for the Bible. And so that's one hundred and twenty, twenty five plus the 70, 75 with shipping.

So I got like right at two hundred dollars out of pocket. All right.

And then the the the eight days it takes them to make a batch.

Labor is worthy of his wage. And I am, you know, hand stitch and like the stitching, everything is hand done.

Everything is hand. That's like these things do not fall apart. You can't buy anything like this.

Even all the rebinders out there, like the style that they do, they stowed it for me. I came up with a style on this

LSB leather. The leather they get, they get those be not as good as the leather I get.

I get theirs from China and China. And I'm sorry. I'm still in it. But China and Korea, I get mine from from Italy.

And and this is mostly from Italy. And just so everybody knows, this is the this is the judge of PTO Bibles right here.

There's not another one made like it. If you notice, I mean, I make them.

Of course, I'm going to make myself the best one. I mean, look at I mean, you've got blue and you got silver.

We got to get back to the video. You guys. This is.

Hey, your Bibles are nice. I are. They are absolutely. Look, you pay how much for a new phone?

That allows you to do two years at most two years. I bought a John MacArthur Church Grace Community.

Did you give it? Do you have a 2002? What's her name? Dineen Dineen.

Oh, I wonder if she has one of them. Oh, I wonder if she does. NASB Grace Community Church.

You know, the conference one. Oh, my goodness. The the shop con one. Do you have one of those?

Oh, sorry. OK, Bible. All of the Mormons. Well, I do.

Well, I do think you are a polytheist. So and I don't.

I think that if your God were to exist, I would want to go to hell. OK, so that's where you're going.

Yeah. Take care. That's how the video ends. Dude, I really hope you get the gospel and repent and believe or else your wish is going to come true, my friend.

Yeah, that is. But but you know what? I mean, listen,

I mean, the gospel. We've we've said it before. The gospel is impregnatory.

It is judgment on those who want to remain in their sin, who cannot see

God for who he is, who want to love their sin more than Christ, who died to pay the penalty for your sin.

If you would just repent and submit and bow the knee, you can have life eternal.

But if not, you will you will go to hell and you will burn and it will be a darkness that none of us could even imagine.

That's the reality of it right now. You want me to pull that video back up? Yeah. Pull back up real fast.

I do want to just show this. Yeah. Look at this light, dark.

This is a man that spent several hours trying to get through to this blinded individual who's dead in his sins.

That is a true a Christian needs to remember that these these people, these people that reject

Jesus Christ, the biblical Jesus Christ, they are dead in their sins. And you could spend another 10 hours here and never talk this person into heaven.

And yeah, I'm sorry to interrupt. I was just I was just going to add that. And God is glorified in that right there.

Right there. He's glorified. Aaron, good job, man. Aaron is a man that loves Dustin enough to stand out there for two hours.

Amen. Knowing that God and he's a man that loves Jesus enough to tell this individual about him. But the

LDS are claiming to believe in Jesus Christ. However, Jesus Christ claimed that all the inerrant and sufficient

Old Testament scripture pointed to him and the

LDS are not being consistent and looking at the word of God alone for their sufficient role of all saving faith and knowledge.

And so that you're not believing in the same Jesus. And that's why you have started to deny the deity, the singularity of the deity of Christ, and that he is immutable.

And then he does not change that. He is the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the last, that there's none before him nor after him.

You want to claim you have made a God in your own mind and you are wanting to claim that you are ontologically the same or similar to the father.

And how dare you? That's not biblical Christianity. No, it's not.

By at least the first two commandments. That's right. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Aaron, are you on Facebook by chance? He is. Yeah. Okay.

I'll look for him. All right. He's a good dude. Yeah, he is. He has a great debate with I can't ever say his name.

It's the guy that James White had a conversation with him with Jeff Durbin. It's the LDS Kwaku or however you say.

Yeah, Kwaku. Kwaku. Yeah, I just got one of my Bibles, man. Yeah, dude. That's bad.

A Mormon's got one of my Bibles and most of my peeps on here don't. You know what? And to answer her, she asked if she would have sent me a

Bible. It really depends, you know, but you can get one bound for 300, you know, and I mean, the leather itself, the materials cost me nearly 125.

I'm not making a killing. I wish I was though. If everyone would pay me my royalties, they owe me.

I'd be all right. I wouldn't complain a bit. Tell me how many

Bibles can do this. Just let me show you this real quick. Look at this flop. Yeah. Watch out there.

Take off. I know it's already flying out. Look at this. Oh, my goodness.

Like, that is just, like, whew. I mean, it's at least flat. That's a beautiful Bible.

It's dark in here, but, man, that is nice stuff. All right. Well, that's all

I got. I will say this, and this is a true statement. I am the only one that has the totalistic imprint right there.

Right now. Right now. This is the goat.

This is the goat. Brayden, if you could pull up those two pictures.

Oh, yes. Let me do that right now. My fault. We got two pictures? Yeah, we got one of you riding the elephant.

Don't worry. We're blurring it up. It's with your weird nose, too. What? Man. I have a picture of Jeff.

As long as you don't either, you freaking jackal. It's about to be a one man show, so I'm over here trying to advertise for our upcoming conference.

Yeah. Oh, this is fantastic. Yeah. You want to go to war?

I'll take you to war. That's right. Listen, if you're not coming to this conference missing out like what are you doing with your life?

I mean, I could do without three people being there. Actually, I'll say four. Jeff, myself, Tom, and obviously

Andrew doesn't going to be there. Because he's the only person.

Yeah, this is going to be a really good conference. Listen, as good as the conference is like, we also have

Kenny and Claire coming back as good as the conference is, which the conference is phenomenal. The conference alone is worth the money.

Right. But the fellowship, like if you actually come and hang out with us afterwards, meet us at the restaurants, meet us at the cigar shops and hang out with us.

It is a blast. And I guarantee you,

I guarantee you. Listen, I talked to a guy the other day. He goes to the G3s. He goes to all the MacArthur stuff.

Right. And he says Open Air Theology is the best conference. Absolutely. Hands down.

We have fun. It's well organized because I put it together. But we have a lot.

Women can come as well. Yeah. Yeah. This is for men and women.

Men and women. And children. Bring the children. Yeah. Don't give the children cigars or nothing.

Yeah. Yeah. If you want to go hang out at the cigar shop with us, don't bring the kids. No, but the preaching is

God glorifying. I mean, we make much of Christ. We're going to go out there. We're going to have an evangelism event where we actually go out on the streets.

Come and watch us do it. Participate with us. Hand out tracts with us. I mean, we make much of Christ at this conference.

Yeah, absolutely. And Greg Moore is going to be the host. And Greg Moore from Dead Man Walking Podcast.

That's phenomenal. Can you throw the link to it in the comments?

I don't have that. And then we have over here at the other top is Jeremiah Nortier. And we'll pull up his graphic.

And he's going to be the debater. Yeah. So we're having a debate.

We don't have the graphic made for the pre -conference yet. I'm hoping to get it out Monday or Tuesday.

But we'll have it for the next show. And the pre -conference is going to be on Evangelism Boot Camp, where we're going to be walking through people how to evangelize.

So here's the debate that we're having. Listen, this is going to be good. Jeremiah Nortier has become a really good friend of mine.

Him and I talked for hours. And you might think, oh, y 'all just agreeing with everything. No, me and Jeremiah, we fight.

Just like me and these two guys. We fight about it. And we have fun doing it.

Yeah, it is what it is. That's why we have Jeremiah on here sometimes. He's someone that throws his sword out.

And he's not afraid to cut you. And then

Lucas. Lucas is the guy. He debated, I believe he debated an apology at church, one of the deacons there.

And he seems to be a really good guy. I text back and forth with him. And then

I'm hearing really good things about him. Just a lovely guy.

I can't wait to meet him. I mean, he's wrong on this subject. But we got to have somebody to debate, right?

But yeah, so this will be the debate. This will be the last thing that happens on Saturday.

And then after the debate, we'll be headed back out and doing some street preaching. So I would encourage you to come and join us.

Come and hang out with your boys and have a good time. And listen,

I say this because I love you. If you come to the conference, I'm going to expect you to buy me a sandwich. Okay.

It is what it is. My favorite food is free. Okay. If you come to the cigar shop,

I'm going to expect you to buy me a cigar. Other than that, we're good. That's right. Yeah.

Oh, you sure do. Both of you do. Don't you both? I'm going to get you a cheap one. No, we don't do cheap ones.

I'm going to buy you a $20 one from here in Idaho. It'll be a $2 one there in Texas. Jack legs.

Jack legs is what they both are. Take it off the screen and we'll close. We'll shut it down.

I got to go smoke me a cigarette. That's what I'm going to do too. Lost City.

This is an Opus X by something or other. Listen, I got a $2 cigar over here that burns just as good.

I don't know. This is a good cigar right here. Hold on. Where's the thing? There it is. Let me know where you're going.

You guys. It looks really good. It's not dark enough for me. No. So this is really smooth.

It's good. Full flavor. This is a good cigar. There we go.

That looks better. I didn't even see that one. It is right.

Look at that, guys. Look at that. I just want. You don't have the gay beard.

We need to have props given where props are due. Look. Look. Your neckline fits perfectly.

My neckline. Look at that. Seamless. Look at that. Even Tom. Tom don't have a neck.

I just got lift up a beard. It's there. It's there. Anyway, that's what the thumbnail was supposed to be.

Jeff, Jeff messed it up. You messed it up. I mean, we.

And just so everybody knows, we got on them too. I mean, we got on hard. He he cried a little bit.

Alright, last words. Go ahead.

I gotta pull it up. Okay, I'll pull this one. Come to the conference! That's the last word.

What is this? That's a good last word right there.

There's your last word. Yeah, that's mine. Grace Bible Church, Moorpark.

If you live in that area, Southern, it's Ventura County. Go check out Grace Bible Church. Oddly enough,

I go to Grace Bible Church, but Bernie, Texas. So we're a thousand miles away from each other. Same, same, same name.

I'm the only one that goes to a church that actually has a name that if you hear it, you know what exactly we believe.

Covenant Reformed Baptist Church in Tullahoma, Tennessee. Hey now.

My church name. I thought you just said your, no, no, no, no, no, no. I thought you said your name was

Covenant. And then you're just adding a reformed Baptist. Reformed Baptist Church. Covenant Reformed Baptist Church.

Yeah, Covenant don't say nothing. No, but I mean, the name is Covenant, but we are a

Reformed Baptist Church. And so you say Covenant Reformed Baptist Church. I mean, it could be Covenant, Doctrine, Covenants, you know,

Mormonism. Ooh, is it a Mormon, is it a? No, we beat Mormons up.

That's why you repented. Is it the latest of the latest? It's the Covenant 1689

LDS. Anyways, I'm the one that has the name that's better than, the name of my church beats their church up.