The Mormon illusion part 3.

The author of this book start his chapter 7 with these intriguing questions.
Is the God of Mormonism the God of the Bible? Is the Christ of Mormonism the Christ of the Bible?
After those questions he starts to say that the problem is this declaration: "As a man is, God once was: as God is man may be."
 Trying to destroy this idea he quotes the best scripture to support it.
1 Corinthians 8:5-6
"For though there be that are called gods, wheter in heaven or in earth, (AS THERE BE GODS MANY, AND LORDS MANY) but to us there is one God"."
According to the writer "In this verse the apostle Paul is referring to pagan polytheism" Well that is pure assumption for many simple reasons, Paul doesn't say that first, second being the God of the heathen MYTHS, how they could be in HEAVEN LIKE PAUL IS DECLARING, they don't exist. Aside this Paul is maintain that even though there are many Gods and Lord for Us there is only one. To support his strange idea, I mean strange because in his reasoning he is giving a place in the heaven to the heathen divinities that are Myths, he quote Isaiah 43:10 that it states Before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
but he forget to quote Isaiah 48:12-18
In Isaiah 48:12-16 we read, "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last. Mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth, and my right hand hath spanned the heavens: when I call unto them, they stand up together. All ye, assemble yourselves, and hear; which among them hath declared these things? The LORD hath loved him: he will do his pleasure on Babylon, and his arm shall be on the Chaldeans. I, even I, have spoken; yea, I have called him: I have brought him, and he shall make his way prosperous. Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me."
The New Testament identifies Jesus as Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, while the Old Testament identifies Jehovah as being the first and the last. The New Testament declares that it was Jesus who created the earth, while the Old Testament says that Jehovah created the earth. Are there two Gods with the same name who created the earth or is Jesus and Jehovah the same being? Since we believe there is only one God, then we are forced to conclude that Jesus Christ of the New Testament is the same as Jehovah of the Old Testament.
But notice what Jehovah said: "I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me." In other words, Jehovah was sent from another God and His Spirit. That makes three different persons in the Godhead who have three different callings. Although Jehovah was known to the Israelites from their beginning, yet they didn't understand His relationship with Elohim. Unfortunately, most Christians today don't understand this relationship..
At this point I am sure that my friend will agree that at least he believe in the trinity, probably he doesn't know that believe in the trinity makes him a politeist. At this point we could discuss the trinity, but I want to make this topic easy. We believe in trinity but every person of that is different, instead the trinity is preaching this guy is 3 person in the same person. I don't want to spend much writing on this it is enough to say that there is only a scripture in the Bible supporting this idea and it is a spurious verse, that it means many people are not believing that is autentich. I am saying this because John 1:1 doesn't support a trinity utmost a double personality. Instead we have a bunch of scriptures proving that The Father, The Son and the Holy Ghost are different personality.
John 17:3
Jesus maintains that the Father is the Only true God.
John 17:5
Jesus is saying he was By and not in The Father
if you read the verse 6 you will be surprised because the Jew knew the name of their God (Jehowa) but still he was sincere he proclaimed the name of the Father (Helohim)
Hebrew 1:2-13
Jesus inherited, this means that he received something he didn't have before, he sat to the right SIDE and he became HIGHER THAN THE ANGELS, that it means that before.... You are my beloved son Today I HAVE GENERATED YOU.
He didn't do his will but the will of His Father, because they had 2 different wills.
He didn't know the time of HIS PERSONAL SECOND COMING, THIS IS RIDICULOUS IF YOU MAINTAIN THAT THEY ARE THE SAME PERSONS.
But the most interesting thing is in John 16:7-15
Jesus and the Holy Ghost, apparently they could stay in the SAME PLACE!!!!!!!!
You could swear Jesus and still you could be saved, but if you swear the Holy Ghost you don't have anymore choice!!!!!

So if this guy wants to maintain his idea he should at least maintain that he is worshipping at least 3 Gods and that is making him a politeist even though he thinks different.
Regarding The problem ""As a man is, God once was: as God is man may be."
John 10:31-36 "Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself GOD. (Who was the God of the Israelites? Jehovah! It's clear from this passage that they understood what Jesus meant when He said "I am he.")
"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Ye are Gods! Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?"
We learn two things from this scripture. The first one is the key. This is the first and only time Jesus ever stated that "THE SCRIPTURE CANNOT BE BROKEN." And why did He say this? Because He wanted to make sure that they would understand this glorious message.
Or to make this more clear I'd like to remark that Jesus loved to name Himself like "The Son of Man"
Fortunately Jesus explained this relationship in John 17:26: "And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them."
Paul supports this concept in Ephesians 3:14-15 "For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named."
Here we have another great key, Paul is saying that the Father gave the name of the whole family in heaven and hearth. The Word Elohim is plural, and comes from a singular feminine word Alah or Eloh. When we add "IM" to a Hebrew singular word, it becomes plural. However, "IM" is usually the ending of the plural masculine, but here it is added to a feminine name. Therefore, the word "Elohim" conveys the sense of a feminine and masculine power being united. In marriage we also see feminine and masculine power united and becoming one (Genesis 2:24). And it is the power of a man and a woman in marriage that is needed to create a family. Could it be the word Elohim also means "FAMILY?"
Mormons believe that all of mankind belongs to a celestial family. Paul also tells us there is a family in heaven (Ephesians 3:15). Was he also a Mormon? But he didn't need to be, because it is so easy to understand. If there is a Son of God, who is Jesus, and that He had a Father in heaven, does that not indicate that there is a FAMILY in heaven? But if there is a Father and a Son in heaven, is there perhaps a Mother in heaven as well? And if not, what kind of strange Family do we have here? I am not trying to be funny. Instead, I am only trying to understand what Paul and Jesus meant by what they said.
Another intriguing declaration that Jesus made is that He called Himself "the Son Of Man." In fact, He called Himself by that name eighty-four times. But what did He mean by this title? Was He trying to point out that His Father was a Man? Most Christians say "no", but Joseph Smith learned in his First vision that indeed God is a glorified and perfect man.
Hebrew 1:1-3
1
God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3
Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of His person and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:

well I don't need to add nothing more.
(To understand more about this subject see "The Son of Man" at www.erols.com/crest/sonoman.htm)
Genesis 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." If mankind is made in the image of God and there is a Family in heaven, does this not seem to indicate that we too belong to the Family of God? The scriptures tell us that Adam was the son of God (Luke 3:38). That seems to suggest that we are the literal spiritual offspring of God.
But what kind of a being is God? According to many people He is invisible. And why do people believe that? Because of what the apostle John wrote: "No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us" (John 4:12). But this seem to contradict what the Old Testament says. Many of the prophets, such as Ezekiel, Isaiah. and especially Moses, saw God many times and in many different ways.
In Numbers 12:6-8 we read, "he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream. My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house. With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?"

Does this mean that the New and Old Testament contradict each other? Not at all. In the Old Testament, the prophets spoke face to face with the Son, Jehovah, who is Jesus. On the other hand, John was referring to the Father, not the Son. Obviously, many people saw God, the Son, especially when He walked among men in the flesh. Then why doesn't God, the Father, appear to man? Because, after the fall, it was always Jehovah, the great Mediator between God and man who spoke to the prophets. That is why He is called the "Word" of God. Notice that even when He manifested Himself to Joseph Smith, the Father only introduced His Son, but then it was Jesus who did all the talking.
John 17:22-24 "And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedest me before the foundation of the world."
Here we see that the Father and the Son have the same glory and dwell in the same place. But more than that, our Brother (remember if Jesus and Adam are sons of God, that makes Jesus our brother) loved us so much that He gave His life to help us come live with them in the same place.
Psalms 82:1, 6: "God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.... I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." If God stands in the congregation and judges among the gods, who are the gods that He is referring to? Our Christian friends say that the gods spoken of in Psalms are referring to heathen gods. But if that is so, then that means the true and living God was judging among, or, in other words, with the heathen Gods. But how can this be if the heathen gods are myths? Yet, in the same Psalm, our God clearly states that WE are gods and are therefore children of God. Thus, it is obvious that the gods our Father judges among is US! And if we are children of God, then we must have within us the potential to become like God.
But what was God judging among, or with the gods about? In Job 38:3-7 we read, "Gird up now they loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?"
We're told that the "sons of God shouted for joy" when God built the earth. Who are the "sons of God"? Notice that it speaks of them in the plural sense, so it can't be referring to the one and only begotten Son of God, Jesus. In Psalms we find out that WE are the sons of God. Therefore, it must have been US who shouted for joy when the earth was created. It seems clear to me that this was what God stood in the congregation of His sons and daughters and took judgment about with them.
Jesus made several statement very clear on this topic
John 20

17

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Revelation 2

26

And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:

27

And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.

Revelation 3

21

To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

EVEN AS I is a key.
Romans 8:16
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

Romans 8:17
17 ¶ And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with [him], that we may be also glorified together.
Do you want more?
I believe in the words of Jesus when He said, "the scripture can't be broken." The scriptures mean what they say, and they say that Jehovah and Jesus are the same person, that the Son of God is separate and distinct from God the Father, that we too are the sons of God, which makes us all part of the same Family.
Jesus taught also in John 5:18-21 that he was taught from His personal Dad in everything.The Chapter nine repeat almost the same things
Contradictions Concerning the Person of God.
He is trying to show that there are contradictions in the book of Mormon and doctrine and covenant and so on. That is true in the same way that it seems that there are contradictions in the Bible too. For example he quotes this verse Exodus 33:20 and he forget to have quoted only 5 verses before Exodus 33:11 and probably he never read Numbers 12:6-8

After that he quotes to support his idea John 4:24 "God is a spirit" probably he doesn't know the law of the 2 or 3 witnesses quoted by the Bible itself
John 8:13-18
John 5:31
2 Corinthians 13:1-2
Matthew 18:15-16
One scripture out of context can't be compared to the dozen that are declaring that God was seen many times. That is my problem with guy like this they have one, just one scripture and it doesn't matter if there are dozen different ones, that one is the right one because it fits in their theory. This guy it doesn't believe that God could have a body but he forget that Jesus was resurrected with his personal body like he proved to his apostles and with His body he went in the heaven. He is trying to say that the passages in which God seems to have a body are symbolic, so why not the verse in John 4:24?

Chapter 10 speaks about Priesthood and genealogies

Trying to show that the Latter days saints don't have the melchisedek priesthood he wrote. Mormon historian B.H. Roberts admits that "There is no definite account of the event (the conferring of the Melchisedek priesthood on Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery) in the history of the prophet Joseph, or , for matter of that, in any of our annals.
Well I'd like to ask him if he believes that Melchisedek had that priesthood because even for him was the same we don't have any definite account of the event, don't make this equal to Joseph Smith? What is the problem ? maybe we have the definite account when Jesus received that one? Or the Apostles? See this guy has a problem only with Joseph Smith. is he fair in his judgment?
This guy maintains "The Mormons restored what was never there. There were no officers such as aaronic priest, seventies etc in the new testament church.
Probably he has a very different Bible because in mine I have find those references. at the page 99 of this book he makes this remarkable declaration:"Every Christian is now declared to be a priest according to 1 Peter 2:9" But he forget that because after few verse he quoted:" The death of Christ eliminated the Formal Jewish priesthood and before at page 97 he wrote "Jesus alone, for all time, is our Melchisedek priesthood. For anyone to claim to be a Melchisedek priest today seems exceedingly unwise. Probably he is referring to himself, because he is saying that every Christian is a priesthood but he is saying that the aronic priesthood and the melchisedek priesthood are not anymore on the earth. Please what kind of priesthood do you have? Please specify this because it is becoming a puzzle? are you sure that you know what are you talking about?
Well usually when I have this kind of problem I remark that Jesus gave to the apostles the power and the authority to perform miracles. Is not it the Priesthood?Also in Hebrew Paul explains that In Hebrew 7:11-17 we also learn, "If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest, Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life. For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec."Melchisedec was a priest. That means he held a priesthood. Jesus was was given the same priesthood that Melchisedec had. Therefore, this priesthood which Jesus had was not something new. It was had at least as far back as in the early days of Abraham. Furthermore, we know that Jesus was made a high priest. If he held the same priesthood as Melchisedec, that means Melchisedec was not just an ordinary priest, but a high priest as well.However, notice that when Paul talks about this priesthood he refers to it as an "order." Melchisedec is <b><u>one</u></b> man. An "order" means many people. Apparently Melchisedic wasn't the only one who held this priesthood. He must have belong to an "order." And, if this priesthood was greater than the Levitical priesthood, which the tribe of Levi held under the Mosaic law, and this priesthood held the power of perfection (which the Levitical priesthood didn't) then it seem obvious that the people of Melchisedec's day had the Gospel.Very interesting at this point is Numbers 16:10"And he hath brought thee near to him, and all thy brethren the sons of Levi with thee:and seek ye the priesthood also?"But the sons of Levi had already the priesthood, so it means clearly that they had knowledge about a greater priesthood otherwise why they were looking for another priesthood according to the words of Moses?In Hebrew 7:24 and Hebrew 7:3 we further read, "But this man , because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually."We can see that Melchisedec was like unto the son of God in that he "abideth a priest continually." If this is so, then why should we be surprised to learn that there are people in the last days who hold this same priesthood? If you read again Hebrew 7:11-12If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?12For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. It seems clear to me that it is speaking about an order not only for Jesus. But anyway we have the proof, on my personal opinion in the words of Peter 1 Peter 2:9But ye are a chosen generation, a ROYAL priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light; WELL AT THIS POINT IF THEY HAd A ROYAL PRIESTHOOD, they should have the priesthood of Jesus himself. Remember the in the melchisedec priesthood, usually the Apostles are called elders, elder Bruce R. Mc Conkie eccetera eccetera. Look like John called himself in 2 John 1:1The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth; and since we need at least 2 witnesses, but there are more, 3 John 1:1The elder unto the wellbeloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth. I
After that he start to declare that the genealogies are useless and so on. Well it is pretty strange this concept to me it is true that Paul in 1 Timothy 1:4 gives the impression that the genealogies are useless, but we don't know exactly what Paul was answering or teaching to Timothy or Titus in Titus 3:9. It is strange because Matthew and Luke they start theyr Gospel even quoting the genealogy of the Lord Himself. The problem with this guy is that he has not idea regarding why Jesus was preaching the Gospel in the spiritual world before to go back in the Heaven. He could go directly in the heaven the very first day, but he went to open the gate and preach his Gospel to the spiritual world like 1 Peter 3:19 and 1 Peter 4:6 explain, but those verse are not important for this persons he prefer to focus his opinion in verse in which is not specify the context. Infact he doesn't have neither an explanation for 1 Corinthians 15:29 or Malachi 4:5-6 only assumptions but in Isaiah 61:1 is specified that a part of the mission of the Messiah was to open the gate. Paul himself in Hebrew 11:40
When Jesus said in Matthew 16:18
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
He was probably referring to this problem, he is speaking clearly regarding the gates of the hell, surely it is hard to connect this to the apostasy, but it is more clear connect this to the redemption to the deed
After that he quoted, 1 Thimothy 1:4 speaking regarding genealogy and so on, taking out of context sure you could give every meaning you want, but are you sure that Paul writing to Thimoty was writing this, thinking about the letter he wrote to the Corinthians? I don't think so, I can't prove it, but neither you, because Paul said the sentence without specify if it was related to the baptism for the dead, your it is pure assumption. I know you refer this because today we do our genealogy, but the case is different. They kept the records for another reason, before of Christ there was not the baptism for the dead, there was no need of genealogies for the purpose you think.Did you ever realize that 1 chronicles and 2 chronicles are totally genealogy's books. Why if the genealogies are useless Matthew starts talking about the genealogy of Jesus?Anyway I want to help you to better understand this doctrine. Isaiah 14:9 this is only to make clear that they were awaiting for himPsalms 88:10-12Here it is clear is prophesied that Jesus would have preached the Gospel there. Why? for the same reason why he did on the hearth, because they could repent.......like Peter explained in this letter. There was not the baptism for the dead before of Christ, because he opened the preaching of the Gospel and above all He did open the Gate. They couldn't perform any baptism because how the dead could accept something without to be preached? Make sense? So in the old Testament it is usual don't find any regarding this because it was something for the new covenant. Hebrew 6:2 it speaks about the doctrine of the BAPTISMS (plural). Jesus did set up a sample on the earth and he said to be "The Way, the Truth and the life" Noboby can't get the kingdom of God without baptism, so what about the dead? Well the Bible speaks about "Baptisms" and the baptism for the dead, in the old testament is prophesied the opening of the gate from Jesus and I firmly believe that Jesus was referring to this when he said in Matthew 16:18-19 He was referring to the power of sealing and that the scheol couldn't not prevail.So Peter explained that Jesus opened the gate and preached the Gospel there, Paul was speaking about the baptism for the dead, we don't need to rearrange any phrase, everything it is going in the right spot smoothly and sweetly.
Even in the old testament was foreseen this problem Psalm 88:10-12

10 ¶ Wilt thou shew wonders to the dead? shall the dead arise [and] praise thee? Selah.

Psalms 88:11
11 Shall thy lovingkindness be declared in the grave? [or] thy faithfulness in destruction?

Psalms 88:12
12 Shall thy wonders be known in the dark? and thy righteousness in the land of forgetfulness?

Psalms 88:13
Chapter 11
Some distinctive but dubious doctrines of Mormonism.


He start quoting polygamy.
to have a better comprehension of my answer please go to "Polygamy"
Anyway before to close his chapter regarding "Polygamy" the writer wrote President Woodrouff said God told him that the EVERLASTING covenant was nul  . The writer adds:" It seems to us that Mormon are damned if they do and damned if they don't, because it is rather difficult to understand, if Joseph Smith revelation was truly everlasting, how it could be annulled even temporally. Does this not make the word everlasting meaningless?
That is a good question.
Genesis 17:7-8
7 ¶ And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.

Genesis 17:8
8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.
Hebrew 11:12-16
11 Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised.

Hebrews 11:12
12 Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, [so many] as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable.

Hebrews 11:13
13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of [them], and embraced [them], and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

Hebrews 11:14
14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.

Hebrews 11:15
15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that [country] from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.

Hebrews 11:16
16 But now they desire a better [country], that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.
Genesis 17:13
13 He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
Exodus 40:15
15 And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office: for their anointing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations.
Leviticus 16:34
34 And this shall be an everlasting statute unto you, to make an atonement for the children of Israel for all their sins once a year. And he did as the LORD commanded Moses.
Leviticus 24:8
8 Every sabbath he shall set it in order before the LORD continually, [being taken] from the children of Israel by an everlasting covenant.

Does this not make the word "everlasting" meaningless?
Baptism
Here the author speaks about the baptism of the dead.
He wrote:"1 Corinthians 15:29 here is one example where the Mormons take a verse out of context" and he goes on:"The subject of the passage is resurrection, not baptism. Paul is answering many questions about the resurrection. He says that even THOSE PAGANS (I don't know were he found those 2 words because I checked many Bibles and those 2 words are not in the Bible, I am sure Paul was writing to the saints in Corinthus see verse 1)who baptize for the dead do so because THEY BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. Here I am sorry but I am just confused: the pagans were baptizing for their dead because they believed in the resurrections, what kind of pagans they were, maybe Christians? Only the Christians believed on the resurrection not the pagans, do you have knowledge that the pagans were baptizing at the time of Christ? Or that the pagans believed in the resurrection? neither Peter and the other Apostles believe on it until Jesus shows up. I am sorry but at this point this guy, on my opinion is clearly trying to declare something that the real scripture doesn't declare. This letter was addressed to the saint and never Paul mentions in this chapter pagans, heathen, infact you should take a look at the verse 12
2 ¶ Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
among you is the key, Paul was speaking about those people that were in the middle of the saints that THEY DIDN'T believe in the resurrection so all the rest is in this context, if you find a verse in which it is said that everything was addressed to the pagans I will accept, could you do that?
The one true church.
The author, who is a Baptist and therefore a Protestant, maintain that there was not an apostasy "there were various Christian groups meeting down thorough the centuries,long before, during, and after the Protestant reformation, who were never a part of the "Mother" church. he is saying that all the martyrs were the true christians and they were Protestants. Well taking this for granted don't make this the "mother" church in apostasy? If the mother church was not in apostasy how could her loose her autorithy? It is interesting because he names those true Christians:"Paulicans, brethren of the common Lot, Montanist, Paterins, Novations, Arnoldist, Cathari, Albigenses, Waldeses, henricans, Anabaptist, Baptists and the well know churches springing out of the Protestant reformation, such as Lutheran, Presbyterian Methodist and so on. So trying to prove that there was not an apostasy he gives us a proof on the contrary, because all those peoples had and have a different beliefs otherwise they should have only one faith not hundred different doctrines. Anyway the crucial point is this. According to the Mother Church they were apostate and they were excommunicated. Luther, the Father of the Protestants was excommunicated from the Catholic church, if there was not apostasy his excommunication was official if there was he had a problem to show us who gave him the same authority that "Mother" church lost for centuries.
The author wrote:' There is only one "true church" mentioned in the Bible, and every true believer, Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran Presbyterian, whatever, belongs to that church the moment he or she receives Christ.Well that is pretty strange, what is the difference between a believer, catholic for example or lds or Protestant? all of them believe in Jesus so according to this guy everybody will be saved. After trying to give a better understanding of this he wrote:"There are hundreds of churches (Thanks) and denominations, and some with no denominations, that teach basically the same (then why they don't join togheter?) thing about Jesus Christ and his wonderful salvation and also all major, fundamental doctrines of the Bible (could you believe that?). That is why hundreds of different churches and denomination can get togheter happily to hold city wide evangelistic meeting.
We do have SOME DIFFERENCES THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO US INDIVIDUALLY. We have different WAYS OF GOVERNING OUR CHURCHES where the Bible DOES not spell out clearly ( so they are missing the guide of the Holy Ghost because that is His Purpose). Probably the author never read or if did he misunderstood this passage Ephesians 4:11-13
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

Ephesians 4:12
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

Ephesians 4:13
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ:
well in what this guy was trying to explain it is pretty clear to me that he has no idea what really means unity of faith.

The final autorithy.
The writer maintain that the Bible is the final autorithy, while the Mormons teach that the revelation by the prayer is the key to know the truth. He quote :' Mc Conkie "The spirit of revelation consists in having thought placed in one's mind by the power of the Holy Ghost" But according to this guy this is not true and he quotes"The word of God says that we cannot trust our OWN thoughts ( But Mc Konckie didn't say that) because we have reprobate minds> But he forget that Mc Conkie was speaking about the influence of the Holy Ghost, this guy don't support neither the Holy Ghost!!
He wrote:" In trying to verify the autorithy of Mormon teachings, Mormons sometimes declare that they had a " burning bosom" and after that you should pray to know the truth.The psychology of this, as well as the satanic trap, is obvious.
well it seems to me that the Bible support those kind of things.
Luke 24:32
32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?
and what about the revelation to be superior to the Bible?
What is the Revelation? Surely is the manifestations of the divine will to the men. How it happens? Many people sustain that the scriptures reveal the will of the Lord and this is partially true, but what are in reality the scriptures? The scriptures are revelations received from inspired people like Peter was teaching in II Peter 1:20-21
20
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
so it is logical to think that in the beginning there were not scriptures and that everything begun trough a different channel, by which we continue to receive.
We will try to show this insight by the Bible.
Genesis 4:26
And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.
This is the point in which the Bible declare that the men started to call upon the name of the LORD. I'd say they begun to pray. It is interesting to note, like before of this the Lord was spending time to teach the man in his material necessity, for example  Genesis 4:1
Adam [1] lay with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. [2] She said, "With the help of the LORD I have brought forth [3] a man."
It is clear for me that "with the help of the Lord" it means that God taught her the technique of the delivery. After that surely He taught Cain and surely Adam and Abel  regarding the sacrifices in the likeness of the coming of the Messiah, like we saw in the previous chapter, this is clearly revelation and it is not by chance that the next veers to Genesis 4:26 that is Genesis  5:1 declare:
This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
we have the first book in the mankind and if the Bible mentions it , clearly it means was a good book , in fact the Bible contains several verses of it until the flood, it is easy to think that it was longer than what we have now in the Bible otherwise it couldn't be named a book, anyway what it is important here is the fact that after the men were beginning to pray they received revelation from God and they were writing a book, by the way who taught them to write? and who taught them to build a book or something like that if not God Himself? Seeing the familiarity , by which God was discussing with Cain it wouldn't be strange at all that this same familiarity would be used with Adam o Seth, right? So we could affirm that the first men received direct revelation by God, by which they were instructed first on the principles of the Atonement (sacrifices) because they are the  pivot of the salvation and also because the first principle,e of the Gospel is the faith in  the Lord Jesus or Jehovah, but soon after this they were taught to pray and soon after we started to have the scriptures or the first book, hey hey it is not my fault the Bible is saying this, nobody can say different  it is so clear, so now we know that the scriptures came out by revelation, therefore who is thinking that the scriptures are more important than direct revelation from God is making a big mistake, because the work can't be greater than the Maker. let's go to analyze how we can receive revelation by the prayer, and it has to go according to the promise in the Book of Mormon, do you remember it? desire, having faith in Christ.
I King 9:1-3
1
And it came to pass, when Solomon had finished the building of the house of the LORD, and the king's house, and all Solomon's desire which he was pleased to do,
2
That the LORD appeared to Solomon the second time, as he had appeared unto him at Gibeon.
3
And the LORD said unto him, I have heard thy prayer and thy supplication, that thou hast made before me: I have hallowed this house, which thou hast built, to put my name there for ever; and mine eyes and mine heart shall be there perpetually.
See I don't need to make any comments here.
II Chronicles 15:15
And all Judah rejoiced at the oath: for they had sworn with all their heart, and sought him with their whole desire; and he was found of them: and the LORD gave them rest round about.
The same for this.
Psalms 21:2
Thou hast given him his heart's desire, and hast not withholden the request of his lips. Selah
Clear.
Daniel 2:18-19
"That they would desire mercies of the God of Heaven concerning this secret; that Daniel and his fellows should not perish with the rest of the wise men of Babylon.Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of Heaven."
Pretty clear isn't it?
The Book of Mormon declares this feeling very well, the second ingredient quoted in the promise is the faith in the Lord Jesus, I will quote very few verses about the faith because I'd like to discuss this topic in another page.
Surely the best scripture to be post near Moroni 10 is James 1:5-6
5
If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
6
But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.

Matthew 9:28-29

28
And when he was come into the house, the blind men came to him: and Jesus saith unto them, Believe ye that I am able to do this? They said unto him, Yea, Lord.
29
Then touched he their eyes, saying, According to your faith be it unto you.
Look the faith is a power, a real power, in this case the question of Jesus teach us something, compare this verse to this one .
Matthew 13:58
And he did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief.
See in this case the powerful power of Jesus had nothing to do, when we will discuss about the faith, there will be another important topic to discuss:"The free agency"
let's see another interesting scripture related to this topic.
Matthew 14:28-31
28
And Peter answered him and said, Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water.
29
And he said, Come. And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water, to go to Jesus.
30
But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, save me.
31
And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?

Also in this case was the faith of Peter to cause the problem. Once I was praying to solve a big problem and while I was doing so the voice of the Lord came on my mind: More faith you have more power you give me!.
so at this point I want to conclude this topic. I'd say that the promise contained in the book of Mormon satisfy completely what is contained in the Bible.
and what about the Prayer
The celestial source is the only way to communicate with our Father in heaven directly, through the only mediator given to us, Jesus Christ. This wonderful device is based on the faith and the free agency. If you remember the promise contained in Moroni, it speaks about "real intent" and "having faith in Christ". Does the Bible agree with this promise?

Matthew 16:13-18: "When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

This simple question that Jesus asked is very important for me. I always wondered why He asked his Apostles who He was after almost three years of being together, shoulder to shoulder. Even more astonishing, is why He had to ask that question after they had witnessed so many miracles and had heard Him teach so many beautiful things about God. But more than that, there had been many times when Jesus had alluded to or affirmed that He was the Messiah and the Son of God.

With this understanding of the life of Jesus and His disciples up to this time, I realized there had to be a important purpose behind this simple question. From the scriptures themselves, it seems that the purpose was to point out the importance of having direct revelation from God as the only sure way to know the true of everything.

Let's analyze this statement of Jesus more closely.

"And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona, For flesh and blood
has not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven...." Here we see that Peter received a revelation of the mission of Jesus directly from God Himself.

"... and I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock..." The word "rock" is the subject of the previous comment, which was about receiving a revelation from God.

"... I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." The topic which Jesus is talking about concerns the revelation which Peter had received from God. Therefore, it is clear that when Jesus refers to how He will build his church, this is an explanation about that revelation which Peter just received.

Unfortunately, others try to interpret this phrase to fit their own ideas. The Catholic church declares that Peter is the rock. This is because in Italian, Peter (Pietro) it is similar to stone (Pietra). Therefore, by changing the context of the phrase, they can maintain that there was no apostasy because Jesus said that "the gates of the hell shall not prevail against it." However, this promise of Jesus, when read in context, only means that it is impossible to be deceived when we receive revelation from God by prayer.

The Protestants who deny the principle of revelation, say that the "rock" refers to Christ, because in another verse it states that Christ is the Rock (1 Corinthians 10:4). That is true, but not in the same sense we find in Matthew. Again, we need to put this verse in context, and when we do we see that Paul is referring to something different than Christ was. Christ's remarks clearly refers to revelation as being the basis of communication between God and man. Also, clearly inferred, is the idea that without this revelation, man is left to be "tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; (Ephesians 4:14).

But did Jesus have anything else to say on this subject? Matthew 7:7-10: "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent?"

What a beautiful promise! But what I would like to take notice of is where Jesus said: "whom if his son ask bread [do you remember who is the living bread?] will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish( Did you know that the fish is a symbol of Christ or Christianity? even now on many car of Protestant people you can see the symbol of the fish and the word "Jesus", will he give him a serpent [do you remember who is the serpent?]" How do we ask anything from our Father in heaven? Is it not by prayer? I don't think Christ's use of the words bread and serpent were by chance. Therefore, it's clear that Jesus is once more promising us that if we pray to God, in return we will receive "bread" or "fish" (the living Christ) rather than the "serpent" (the devil), thus reassuring us about the safety of who answers our prayer.


In another place, Jesus said, "And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive" (Matthew 21:22). This is another promise concerning prayer, but the word "believing," is an important condition of this promise, as we will see.

Mark 11:19-24: "And when even was come, he went out of the city. And in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots. And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree which thou cursest is withered away. And Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith in God. For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith. Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them."

Notice that Jesus used the words "desire" "believe" and "have faith in God."

In John 14:13-17 Jesus made a similar promise: "And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you."

Here Jesus introduce the Comforter.

In Luke 18:1-8 Jesus again gave us another promise about prayer. "And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men ought always to pray, and not to faint; Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man: And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary. And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man; Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me. And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith. And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? I tell you that he will avenge them speedily.  Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?"

This parable of Jesus teaches the importance of constantly praying to God. When we have desire, faith, belief and constancy, then we have the promise that we will receive from the Lord what we are asking for, if it is right.

Because of these promises, if I were Satan, I would certainly strive to fight against the power of prayer with all the means at my disposal. I would try to convince men that prayer doesn't work. I would try to convince men they could be deceived through prayer. I would try to convince men to trust in something more reliable than prayer, such as the words of political/social leaders or convincing preachers or their own interpretation of the Bible.

In fact, this is exactly what we have seen happen in the past as well as in our own day. We should always remember that those who teach that we don't need to pray are not acting in the name of the Lord. Satan usually prefers us to stay in darkness. He wants people not to think about him. It's in that way he can do his work more effectively.

There were two particular occasions when he had to manifest himself. The first one was in the wilderness at the beginning of Christ's mission. We know that he was trying to stop the proclamation of the Gospel and was using the scriptures to try to deceive the Lord Himself. The second time was in the Gethsemane.

Luke 22:39-46: "And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount of Olives; and his disciples also followed him. And when he was at the place, he said unto them, Pray that ye enter not into temptation. And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast, and kneeled down, and prayed, Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done. And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.  And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground. And when he rose up from prayer, and was come to his disciples, he found them sleeping for sorrow, And said unto them, Why sleep ye? rise and pray, lest ye enter into temptation."

The first exhortation Jesus gave his disciples in the Gethsemane was to pray. After that, He himself went off to pray. The scripture then states that while He was in agony an angel appeared from heaven to strengthen him. It is my opinion that His agony and the atmosphere in which He found Himself suggests that the Devil was also there trying to prevent Jesus from carrying out the atonement.

We see a similar situation before Moses began his mission to save the Israelites from captivity. While he was praying to the Lord, Satan appeared and demanded that Moses pray to him. But, "Moses said: I will not cease to call upon God, I have other things to inquire of him: for his glory has been upon me, wherefore I can judge between him and thee. Depart hence, Satan. And now, when Moses had said these words, Satan cried with a loud voice, and ranted upon the earth, and
commanded, saying: I am the Only Begotten, worship me.And it came to pass that Moses began to fear exceedingly; and as he began to fear, he saw the bitterness of hell. Nevertheless, calling upon God, he received strength, and he commanded, saying: Depart from me, Satan, for this one God only will I worship, which is the God of glory. And now Satan began to tremble, and the earth shook; and Moses received strength, and called upon God, saying: In the name of the Only Begotten, depart hence, Satan. And it came to pass that Satan cried with a loud voice, with weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth; and he departed hence, even from the presence of Moses, that he beheld him not." (Moses 1:18-22)

Notice that, like Jesus in Gethsemane, Moses was also strenghten in order to withstand the efforts of Satan to prevent God's plan from being carried out.

And there's yet another time when Satan manifested himself in a similar way. In the history of Joseph Smith History we read, "After I had retired to the place where I had previously designed to go, having looked around me, and finding myself alone, I kneeled down and began to offer up the desires of my heart to God. I had scarcely done so, when immediately I was seized upon by some power which entirely overcame me, and had such an astonishing influence over me as to
bind my tongue so that I could not speak. Thick darkness gathered around me, and it seemed to me for a time as if I were doomed to sudden destruction.

"But, exerting all my powers to call upon God to deliver me out of the power of this enemy which had seized upon me, and at the very moment when I was ready to sink into despair and abandon myself to destruction--not to an imaginary ruin, but to the power of some actual being from the unseen world, who had such marvelous power as I had never before felt in any being--just at this moment of great alarm, I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me" (Joesph Smith 1:15,16)

Once again we see Satan exerting his terrible power to prevent someone from praying. And why was Joseph praying? Because he was following the admonition of James who taught us, "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally and upbraitheth not, and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering" (James1:5-6).

sure he knew what power could have the prayer of Joseph connected to the promise in James, did you know that the epistle of James was the last one to be admitted to the canon? He fight also in that occasion. He had to manifest himself, he had no choice, but he lost!

Somebody will say that the scriptures are the key, we will see that the scriptures are revelations obtained by the prayers of right people and also Satan like in the wilderness interpreted the scriptures, the men do the same we have about 800 different churches, interpreting in 800 different opinions, why this confusion?

I am not saying that the scriptures are not important, I am saying the scriptures are an important tool, but not the key, a tool can destroy the door to open it if you are not able to use it, the key is perfect and easy. Well I can give my testimony in the name of Jesus that the prayer is the only a perfect key to use to open the door At the Holy True, because if you need to buy the beef you go to the Butcher, if you need to know the true you have to ask to the Lord, in Jesus name

Galatians 1:12: "For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ".
After this the writer maintain this:"Since no other revelation is needed, prophets, in the sense of getting revelations directly from God, foretelling future events, and recording them as God given scripture are NO LONGER IN THE CHURCH TODAY.
Well probably he has some more scripture to read. I could quote many reference about this topic but I just want to use only 2 because theay are conclusive. Revelation according to all the christians is the last revelation given to the mankind and it is for "revelation 1:1
1 ¶ THE Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass;
well in this revelation there are 2 interesting declaration about things that it should happen in the future. let's take a closer look at Revelation 10:11

11 And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.

well at least this guy should admit that at least John has to prophesy more than just a revelation, where are those prophesies?
and Revelations 11:3
3 ¶ And I will give [power] unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred [and] threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

well if we have here at least 3 prophets, including John how could we maintain that prophecy should be over at the death of Jesus? Make sense?
At the end of this chapter the author did a masterpiece, at the beginning he was saying that feeling are deceitful and he was working hard trying to show that the feeling are no good and at the end he gives us the proof of how deceitful he is. read this. he wrote:" Several weeks ago, I was presenting Christ and His free and INSTANT salvation to 2 Mormon ladies. Both of them asked Jesus to save them. One lady, who has four Mormons sons who served as missionaries, raised her head and exclaimed, "Vivian, Vivian, you KNOW THAT BURNING FEELING our leaders talk about and you never get, and you wonder what it is? I've got it, I've got it! Needless to say, she based her instant salvation on Jesus and His word but felt that this was a BONUS. Christians DO not ordinarily get or depends on such. god gave this dear lady a special bonus. Could you believe that? This guy is saying that in that special occasion what ,usually was a means of Satan in that particular case was right. probably he thinks that we are stupid but we are not. So we have another case in which the author is scoring in his own basket.
Biblical salvation.
I don't want to debate faith versus works for a simple reason, useless but I want to make some excellent remarks.
Jesus received 3 times a sharp question: Master what I have to do to obtain the eternal life. Unfortunately for the Protestant always he gave the same answer: Obey the commandments!!!
when he was speaking about the Judgment he put the sheep on the right side because they did the works and on the other side the Believers ( Yes believers because they were saying Master when we saw you...) that they didn't do the works.
other than that when in revelation Jesus was speaking to the 7 churches he said
4 Nevertheless I have [somewhat] against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.

Revelation 2:5
5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.

To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich ) and [I know] the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but [are] the synagogue of Satan.

Revelation 2:10
10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast [some] of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.

Revelation 2:11
11 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death.
13 I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, [even] where Satan's seat [is]: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas [was] my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.

Revelation 2:14
14 But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication.

Revelation 2:15
15 So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.

Revelation 2:16
16 Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.

Revelation 2:17
17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to
19 I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience, and thy works; and the last [to be] more than the first.

Revelation 2:20
20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.

Revelation 2:21
21 And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not.

Revelation 2:22
22 Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds.

Revelation 2:23
23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.
25 But that which ye have [already] hold fast till I come.

Revelation 2:26
26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:

2 Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die: for I have not found thy works perfect before God.

Revelation 3:3
3 Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.

Revelation 3:4
4 Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy.

Revelation 3:5
5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

well know read what this guy maintain and probably you will laugh at it.
"God loves you and wants you to know salvation is instant. The moment we repent and turn from our sins to Jesus, He saves us. Christ said to the unbaptised , unsaved thief on the cross " today shalt thou be with me in paradise." ( that is not the kingdom of God it is enough to read 1 Peter and you will see Jesus was speaking about the spiritual world) after this he quotes Romans 10:9
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
This is interesting because I know that THou shalt be saved it is a future tense not a present tense.
anyway this ridicule doctrines was not taught from Paul because he clearly declared this.
But best of all, He didn't believe in that doctrine like the Protestants teach, I.Paul didn't believe in this human's teaching. Philippians 3:11-14
11
If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
12
Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
13
Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
14
I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.
Instant salvation is not in the Bible, unfortunately in this book "Mormon Illusion" there are many strange ideas but if I could rename it I would in "the Protestant delusion" because it was not able to give us neither a clue about what he was trying to prove.