“A Survey of Mormon History and Theology” by Cky J. Carrigan, Ph.D. (Mar 2004)

Historical Survey[1]

The beginning of Mormonism is generally traced to the “first vision” of Joseph

Smith, Jr. (1805-1844) at the age of 14. Smith claimed that this first vision of the

the Heavenly Father and His Son came to him in the spring of 1820, in what is now called the “sacred grove” behind his home outside Palmyra, New York. At the time of the vision, he was seeking God’s direction in prayer about which local church he should join in Palmyra. Joseph tells the story that he was having difficulty deciding whether to join the Baptist, Presbyterian, or Methodist churches. One of the personages in his vision told Joseph not to join any of the existing churches because all of them were “wrong . . . that all their creeds were an abomination . . . [and] that those professors [of those churches] were all corrupt.”[2]

Three years later, at seventeen, Joseph Smith reportedly received his “second

vision” while seeking God in prayer one night in his upstairs bedroom. An exalted being,

Moroni, appeared to Joseph in the midst of a bright light and told him about some golden tablets hidden nearby in the Hill Cumorah. Moroni reportedly appeared to Joseph on several other occasions over the next four years until Joseph was finally permitted to retrieve the golden tablets in 1827. Joseph reportedly translated the tablets through the use of special divining tools he called the Urim and the Thummim. Smith released the publication of his translation entitled, Book of Mormon, in March 1830.[3]

In the spring of 1829, John the Baptist reportedly conferred the Aaronic

Priesthood upon Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery. After some time, Smith and

Cowdery baptized each other by immersion for the remission of sins in the Susquehanna River near Harmony, Pennsylvania. Then, several months later, Peter, James and John

reportedly conferred the Melchizedek Priesthood upon the two of them.[4]

On April 6, 1830, Smith officially organized and legally constituted the Church

with six men at the home of Peter Whitmer, Sr. in Fayette, New York. The original name of this Church was “Church of Christ.” The name was changed to “Church of Latter-day Saints” in 1834 and to “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” in 1838.

Joseph and other Mormons migrated from central New York State to Kirtland,

Ohio, Independence, Missouri and Nauvoo, Illinois. Charges that Mormon leaders were

engaging in polygamy began to circulate widely in the early 1840’s. On June 7, 1844, the

one and only issue of the Nauvoo Expositor was published by several ex-Mormons. An article appeared in this inaugural issue leveling polygamy charges against Mormon leaders. Mayor Joseph Smith was unhappy with the charges and influenced the Nauvoo City Council to declare that the Expositor was a public nuisance. As the commander of the Nauvoo militia, the second largest standing army in the United States, Smith ordered the militia to destroy the Expositor’s printing press on June 10.[5] Smith was arrested by the Warsaw militia and taken to the Carthage, Illinois jail where members of the Warsaw militia killed Joseph and his brother Hyrum Smith on June 27, 1844.

The issue of succession followed Joseph’s death. Brigham Young, the President

of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, rallied support for himself in the face of claims that someone else should follow Joseph.[6] Young conducted himself as acting president and prophet until an official church declaration in December 1847 sustained him. This declaration sustained Young after he led the Mormon pioneers through Immigration Pass and founded Great Salt Lake City in the Utah Territory. Young served as the President of the Church for thirty years until his death in 1877. Thirteen presidents have succeeded Young including Gordon B. Hinckley (b. 1910) who presently holds that office.

From the death of Young until the turn of the twentieth century, financial matters together with Mormon colonization, plural marriages and statehood occupied the attention of Mormon leaders in the territory of Utah. In 1879, the United States Supreme Court upheld the Anti-Bigamy Act of 1862 in Reynolds v. United States. In 1887, Congress enacted the Edmunds-Tucker Act that served to dissolve the Mormon Church because of its refusal to obey federal anti-bigamy laws. Much of the Church’s assets were transferred to individuals to escape federal seizure. In 1890, Congress passed the Cullom-Stubble Bill that withheld privileges from Mormons throughout the country on the basis of their association with Utah’s affirmation of plural marriages.

On September 24, 1890, the fourth latter-day president, Wilford Woodruff, issued a manifesto announcing the official suspension of plural marriages. The manifesto was accepted at a general conference on October 6, 1890, and placed in the Doctrine and Covenants in 1908.[7] United States President, Grover Cleveland, declared a general clemency to Utah polygamists in 1894, and on January 4, 1896, the Beehive State became the forty-fifth member of the Union.

The first half of the twentieth century was a period of transition for Mormons. It was an era marked by external expansion and internal consolidation. At the turn of the century the LDS Church and its people were virtually isolated from the broader American scene. But, by the end of the Second World War Mormonism was beginning to enjoy some measure of cultural integration and wider acceptance in American society. The Church expanded its mission enterprise to locations outside the United States and to areas outside Utah. Many doctrines and policies were solidified and codified in the first half of the twentieth century as well.

The second half of the century was marked by rapid international Mormon growth. From the death of the seventh president of the Church until the present, membership among Mormons increased tenfold from just under one million in 1945 to ten million in 2000. During this period, a declaration by President Spencer W. Kimball heavily influenced the rapid expansion of the Mormon missionary enterprise. Kimball declared that the Church would no longer exclude dark-skinned peoples of African descent from the priesthood offices and temple rites. Thus, Official Declaration 2 was issued on June 8, 1978, and sustained by the general conference of September 30 of the same year. The declaration was recorded in the 1979 edition of the D&C.

The impact of this official revelation provided the theological foundation

to extend the Mormon missionary movement to all the dark-skinned peoples of the world.

The above doctrinal amendment together with the visionary leadership of President Gordon B. Hinckley to triple the number of temples worldwide will assure the continued rapid expansion of Mormonism.

Theological Survey

LDS theology is rooted in metaphysical pluralism. According to Sterling

E. McMurrin, a Mormon professor of philosophy at the University of Utah, “Mormon philosophy is an unqualified commitment to metaphysical pluralism. . . . Nowhere is this pluralism more evident than in the doctrine of God, for instance, where not only is the Godhead defined as three independently real persons . . . also there is the idea that for the total universe there is a multiplicity of personal deities who are genuinely real as individuals.”[8]

The metaphysical pluralism of Mormonism also has implications for its

anthropology. According to McMurrin, the essential nature of humans, called “intelligence,” in the LDS program “is an uncreated and underived and therefore an

ultimate constituent of the universe.”[9] “Among the implications of the quantitative

metaphysical pluralism in Mormon philosophy,” wrote McMurrin, “certainly nothing is

more evident or more important than that in principle this radical pluralism militates vigorously against absolutism. . . . The uncompromising pluralism of Mormon metaphysics definitively establishes a foundation for doctrine that in various ways contradicts much that has long characterized both Christian and Jewish thought.”[10]

Additionally, Mormon philosophy poses that man is a finite but necessary

being. McMurrin suggested that this feature of Mormon philosophy might be “the most

important and most interesting distinctive factor in Mormon philosophy.” McMurrin concluded,

It is the belief that though he is finite man nevertheless has necessary being, that constitutes the philosophical justification of much that characterizes Mormon theology, supporting, for instance, its pelagian and arminian tendencies, and giving fundamental encouragement to its accent on the positive facets of human existence. Here is the philosophical ground for the paradoxical Mormon concept of the fall of man, the denial of original sin, the rejection of the traditional doctrine of grace, the intense preoccupation with the freedom of the will, the liberal estimate of human nature, and the affirmation of the radically unorthodox concepts of God and salvation.[11]

In addition to being rooted in metaphysical pluralism LDS theology is

also an enigmatic and eclectic theology.[12] It is a combination of several theological

themes including both fundamentalism and liberalism. Among other things it unites liberal anthropology with a unique concept of God. McMurrin wrote,

The most interesting thing about Mormon theology is that it incorporates a liberal doctrine of man and a radically unorthodox concept of God within a general framework of historic Christian fundamentalism. This anomaly marks the distinctive character of the theology and sets its basic problems. It provides the Mormon religion with intellectual foundations which are compatible with its biblical literalism yet support its humanistic temper.[13]

Describing LDS theology, McMurrin also wrote,

Mormon theology is a modern Pelagianism in a Puritan religion. Mormonism is a Judaic-like community religion grounded in the Puritan moral doctrine that the vocation of man is to create the kingdom of God. Its fundamentalism is rooted in the denial of the dogma of original sin, a heresy that exhibits both the disintegration of modern Protestantism and the impact of nineteenth-century liberalism on the character of American sectarianism.[14]

Perhaps the most important characteristic of LDS theology is its relative lack of

precision and sophistication as compared to evangelical systematic theology. Mormons prefer the remarks of their prophets to highly structured, internally consistent propositions about doctrine. Perhaps this is why a rigorous attempt to systematize Mormon doctrine has not been written. Consider the following remarks by Sterling McMurrin,

Mormon theology is young and unsophisticated and is not overencumbered with creeds and official pronouncements. Its structure has been virtually untouched by serious and competent effort to achieve internal consistency or exact definition. Yesterday it was vigorous, prophetic, and creative; today it is timid and academic and prefers scholastic rationalization to the adventure of ideas. It is in great need of a definition of the relation of reason to revelation that will preserve the intellectual integrity of the Mormon people and encourage them in an honest and courageous pursuit of truth. It needs a conception of religion in history which will conform to the profound Mormon insight into the dynamic character of all things and thereby release the Mormon religion from the tyranny of the past. And it needs and deserves a new appreciation of the strength of those very heresies in the concepts of God and man that must inevitably make of it an offense to the traditional faith but which are the chief sources of its strength and should already have released it from its bondage to orthodoxy.[15]

Mormon theology does not always lend itself to a systematic description.

Distinctive Mormon terminology also works against this enterprise.[16] But, a depiction of general Mormon theology is essential for understanding Mormon Christology. The Mormon God (Heavenly Father) is an exalted man named Elohim with a physical body of flesh and bones.[17] Joseph Smith said that if God made himself visible to humanity, men would see God as a man in form.[18] He also said, “God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man. . . . He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth.”[19] Mormons posit a Heavenly Father who has a body consisting of all the parts usually associated with the male gender. The Father is the supervisory organizer of the matter of this universe of many worlds, but he did not create everything ex nihilo. Although some Mormons describe Elohim as eternal, infinite, omnipotent and omniscient, these terms are often used in relative comparison with mankind and not in an absolute sense.[20] Elohim’s power is great but necessarily limited. His knowledge is great, but necessarily growing. Since he has a body, he necessarily is localized in space. He has changed from a man to a God to a greater God. Elohim is a contingent God. Another greater being caused his transformation from one of many eternal intelligences to an offspring of a god.[21] And finally, while Elohim is the chief God of this universe, he is only one of many chief Gods among many universes.

Mormons affirm the trinity of the Godhead but they define trinitarian terms differently. They affirm that the Godhead is both three and one. The three who are God are three entirely separate Gods in the LDS program. When Mormons speak of the oneness of God they mean oneness of purpose and not oneness of being, or ontological oneness. In sum, Mormons do not affirm the historical doctrine of the Trinity with regard to the nature of the Godhead although they do affirm a kind of trinitarian doctrine.

The LDS Church also has a distinct doctrine of authority and revelation.[22] There are four “standard works” that constitute the basis for Mormon beliefs. These include the Authorized Version of the Bible as far as it is translated correctly, the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price.[23] The Book of Mormon is a narrative about a people of Hebrew descent who lived in Mesoamerica from the sixth century B. C. to the fifth century A. D. The Doctrine and Covenants is a collection of one hundred and thirty-eight direct revelations of God given to Joseph Smith and others, plus two official Church declarations. The Pearl of Great Price is a collection of five documents including Selections from the Book of Moses, The Book of Abraham, Joseph Smith--Matthew, Joseph Smith--History and The Articles of Faith. The Mormon Church also relies upon continuing revelation from God through its prophets as additional authority for Mormon beliefs.[24] There is a fair amount of disagreement between modern Mormons about what actually constitutes authoritative revelation by the prophets and other general authorities and the very nature of latter-day revelation, but there is a general consensus that direct-revelation from God continues through the latter-day prophets of the Church.[25]

The Mormon Church also has several very different doctrines about the Son of

God, which is, of course, the subject of this study, but there are some similarities with evangelical Christology as well. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints affirms the existence of the historical Jesus and describes the historical facts of his earthly sojourn in very similar ways. It teaches that Jesus was Jewish, was from the lineage of King David, and was born in Bethlehem to a woman named Mary. The LDS Church poses that a man named Joseph was Jesus’ stepfather and that Joseph took Jesus and Mary to Egypt. According to Mormonism, Jesus was a carpenter and preacher who taught in the temple and was baptized by John the Baptist. Mormon authorities affirm that Jesus walked on water, turned water into wine, and performed many miracles. Jesus died by crucifixion under Pontius Pilate just outside Jerusalem, in the Mormon program, and an earthquake marked his death. The LDS Church teaches that Jesus was raised bodily from the dead and ascended into heaven. In official Mormonism, Jesus is divine. He is the only begotten Son of God and he is the only perfect man who ever lived. And, the Church contends that everyone who is saved is saved by the Son’s atonement.[26]

The following remarks are but a few of the christological differences between

the Mormon Church and evangelicals. The LDS Church teaches that Jesus was the firstborn spiritual offspring of the Heavenly Father in the pre-mortal realm, or the first estate. The Heavenly Father was also the literal parent of billions of others in the

pre-mortal realm. An official Mormon publication reads, “Every person who was ever born on earth was our spirit brother or sister in heaven. The first spirit born to our heavenly parents was Jesus Christ (see D&C 93:21), so he is literally our elder brother.”[27] Jesus was also the only begotten physical offspring of the Heavenly Father in the mortal realm, or the second estate. The Heavenly Father, endowed literally with a physical body of flesh and bones, sired Jesus Christ. Mormon apostle and thirteenth president of the Church, Ezra Taft Benson, wrote that the Son of God was “sired by that same Holy Being we worship as God, our Eternal Father. Jesus was not the son of Joseph, nor was He begotten by the Holy Ghost. He is the Son of the Eternal Father!”[28]

The Mormon Church also has a vastly different soteriology. In official Mormonism, the atonement of Jesus occurred in the Garden of Gethsemane and on Calvary’s cross but the cross is usually de-emphasized.[29] The atonement of Jesus guarantees immortality for all people of the earth without regard for their religious beliefs or practices, but the atonement does not provide for the complete individual salvation of anyone in the sense salvation means eternal life with God.[30] All earth-born humans are endowed with general salvation because of their meritorious conduct in the first estate in combination with the atonement of Christ. Every individual earth-born person is responsible to be obedient in order to secure the fullest kind of salvation, or individual salvation.[31] Acceptable belief and behavior plus the Mormon temple endowments, eternal

sealings and baptism on behalf of the dead also may secure the fullest kind of individual salvation for those presently in the post-mortal world.[32] The fullest kind of Mormon individual salvation is called exaltation. Exaltation is only available to obedient Mormons who faithfully keep a rigorous code of belief and conduct.[33]

There are three heavens or eternal kingdoms in Mormon doctrine. Only

earth-born, obedient and temple-worthy Mormons enter the Celestial Kingdom after the

resurrection. The Terrestrial Kingdom and the Telestial Kingdom are reserved for just about every other earth-born human. The Terrestrial Kingdom is the place reserved for good non-Mormons and Mormons who never received the temple rites. The Telestial Kingdom is the lowest kind of heaven. It is reserved for those who were found worthy in the first estate, but do not qualify for the Celestial or Terrestrial Kingdoms because of their conduct during the second estate. Only apostate Mormons and extremely vile sinners inhabit a place called Outer Darkness forever.[34] Outer Darkness is also the permanent final abode of all those, including Lucifer, who rebelled against Elohim in the first estate.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also has a distinctive ecclesiology. The LDS Church claims to be the unique latter-day restoration of the true church and the true priesthood. The Latter-day Saint priesthood is the “power and authority of God”[35] and God “shares his priesthood power with worthy male members

of the Church.”[36] The restored true priesthood begins with Elohim, who is God and Priest, and extends to the high priest-president of the Mormon Church. This priesthood also extends down to all worthy males in right standing with the Mormon Church. Typically, the Aaronic Priesthood is conferred on worthy twelve-year-old males

and the Melchizedek Priesthood is conferred on worthy nineteen-year-old males. The

LDS priesthood enables priests “to act in God’s name for the salvation of the human family.”[37]

While the vast majority of LDS religious activities occur in local ward-houses each week, the most holy places in Mormonism are Mormon temples. Mormons cannot enjoy the full benefits of individual salvation that include exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom without engaging in the temple ceremonies of endowments and family sealings

administered by the priesthood.[38] Many LDS ward members never receive a temple recommendation that permits them to participate in temple ceremonies. The resulting consequence of failing to acquire temple endowments is that many LDS ward members cannot enjoy the full benefits of individual salvation unless the temple endowments and sealings are performed on their behalf after their death in a ceremony known as proxy endowments. Recipients of proxy rites must also engage in obedient conduct in the realm of the dead in order to attain exaltation.

---

[1] Mormons would say, however, that the first vision merely marks the beginning of the

restoration of the true church and not the beginning of Mormonism. This brief historical survey is based, primarily, on James B. Allen and Richard O. Cowan, “History of the Church,” Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 5 vols., edited by Daniel H. Ludlow (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1992), 2:598-647. Consult the following general histories for further study: Joseph Fielding Smith, Essentials in Church History, 22^nd ed. (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1972), authored by an LDS apostle and president; James B. Allen and Glen M. Leonard, The Story of the Latter-day Saints (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1992), an official project of the LDS Church historical department designed for an LDS audience; Leonard J. Arrington and Davis Bitton, The Mormon Experience: A History of the Latter-day Saints (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1979; reprint with revisions, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992), a product of an LDS Church historian, Arrington, and his colleague designed for a non-LDS readership; Thomas F. O’Dea, The Mormons (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970), the classic non-LDS work by a Roman Catholic; and Jan Shipps, Mormonism: The Story of a New Religious Tradition (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1985), a non-LDS work by a historian who is favorably received by LDS scholars. Consult the following biographies of Joseph Smith for further study: Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith, the Mormon Prophet, 2^nd ed. (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1995), a groundbreaking biography by a former Mormon that paints an unsympathetic portrait of Smith and Mormonism; Richard Bushman, Joseph Smith and the Beginnings of Mormonism (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1984), a biography and history by an LDS scholar; Donna Hill, Joseph Smith: The First Mormon (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1999), a response to Brodie’s biography by a Latter-day Saint; and Michael D. Quinn, Early Mormonism and the Magic World View (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1998), a highly-researched work by a former Brigham Young University history professor who was excommunicated largely because of this work; Michael H. Marquardt and Wesley P. Walters, Inventing Mormonism – Traditional and the Historical Record (Salt Lake City: Smith Research Associates, 1994), a work by evangelical historians; and Allen F. Harrod, Deception by Design: The Mormon Story (Kearney, Nebraska: Morris Publishing, 1998), a history largely critical of Joseph Smith by an evangelical pastor.

[2] PGP, Joseph Smith-History, 19. There are eight known versions of Smith’s first vision.

The earliest of these versions was recorded in the winter of 1831-1832. The latest and official version was recorded in 1838 in PGP, Joseph Smith-History, 1-20. For a fuller analysis of the first vision by LDS writers, consult Milton V. Blackman, Jr., Joseph Smith’s First Vision: Confirming Evidences and Contemporary Accounts, 2^nd ed. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1980); Dean C. Jessee, “The Early Accounts of Joseph Smith’s First Vision,” BYU Studies 9 (Spring 1969): 275-296; James B. Allen, “Eight Contemporary Accounts of Joseph Smith’s First Vision—What Do We Learn from Them,” Improvement Era 73 (April 1970): 4-13; and Paul R. Cheesman, “An Analysis of the Accounts Relating Joseph Smith’s Early Visions” (Master’s thesis, Brigham Young University, 1965). For an evangelical critique of Smith’s claims that the first vision occurred in 1820, see Wesley P. Walters, “New Light on Mormon Origins from the Palmyra Revival,” Dialogue: Journal of Mormon Thought 4 (Spring 1969): 59-81; a response to Walters by Richard L. Bushman, “The First Vision Story Revived,” Dialogue 4 (Spring 1969): 82-93; and a counter-response by Walters, “A Reply to Dr. Bushman,” Dialogue 4 (Spring 1969): 94-100.

[3] PGP, Joseph Smith-History, 27-54.

[4] PGP, Joseph Smith-History, 66-75. See also D&C 13; 27:8, 12-13; 84:18; Moses 6:67-68.

[5] The reason for Smith’s anger about the public disclosure of plural marriages is unclear

since the LDS Church openly admits that Smith and other Mormons practiced plural marriages until 1890. One can only speculate about his motivation for destroying the printing press that publicly disclosed a practice reportedly ordered by God. There is a pattern of uneasiness about the public disclosure of other unique Mormon doctrines as well.

[6] The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints based in Independence, Missouri

claims that Joseph Smith’s son was the rightful successor to Joseph Smith and not Brigham Young. There is some question, however, about when this claim for the succession of Joseph Smith’s son was made. For a non-authoritative analysis of the first presidential succession, see D. Michael Quinn, “The Mormon Succession Crisis of 1844,” BYU Studies 2 (Winter 1976): 187-233.

[7] D&C, “Official Declaration 1.”

[8] Sterling M. McMurrin, The Philosophical Foundations of the Mormon Religion (Salt Lake

City: University of Utah Press, 1962), 8.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid., 10. Metaphysical pluralism in this context admits a multiplicity of individual instances

of material and mental substances.

[11] Ibid., 29.

[12] For a general survey of LDS theology from an LDS perspective, consult the First Presidency

of the LDS Church, Gospel Principles (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1997); The Church Educational System of the LDS Church, Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual: Religion 231 and 232 (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1986); A Sure Foundation: Answers to Difficult Gospel Questions (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1988); Rulon T. Burton, We Believe: Doctrines and Principles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Salt Lake City: Tabernacle Books, 1994); and Sterling M. McMurrin, The Theological Foundations of the Mormon Religion (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1965). For a general survey of LDS theology from an evangelical perspective, consult Norman L. Geisler, ed., The Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism: The Great Divide Between Mormonism and Christianity (Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers, 1998); Anthony A. Hoekema, Mormonism (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1963); and R. Philip Roberts, Tal Davis and Sandra Tanner, Mormonism Unmasked (Nashville: Broadman and Holman Publishing, 1998). For an evangelical description and critique of the LDS doctrine of God, see Francis J. Beckwith and Stephen E. Parrish, The Mormon Concept of God: A Philosophical Analysis (Lewiston, New York: Edwin Mellon Press, 1991); and James R. White, Is the Mormon My Brother? Discerning the Differences Between Mormonism and Christianity, (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1997). For a Roman Catholic treatment of LDS doctrines, see Isaiah Bennett, Inside Mormonism: What Mormons Really Believe (San Diego: Catholic Answers, 1999).

[13] McMurrin, Theological Foundations, forward.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid., 112.

[16] For an evangelical description of Mormon terms, see Steve Bright, “The Semantic Divide: An

Evaluation of Mormon Semantics” Journal of Christian Apologetics 2:1 (Spring 1999); available at http://ses.edu/journal/issue2_1/2_1bright.htm; accessed September 12, 2000.

[17] D&C 130:22. For a non-authoritative LDS explanation of the LDS doctrine of God, see Blake

Ostler, “The Mormon Concept of God,” Dialogue 17 (1984): 65-93.

[18] Joseph Smith, “King Follett Sermon (April 7, 1844),” History of the Church of Jesus Christ

of Latter-day Saints, 7 vols., introduction and notes by B. H. Roberts (Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, 1902; reprint Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, Co., 1978), 6:305. For further study on the “King Follett Sermon,” see Donald Q. Cannon and Larry E. Dahl, eds., The Prophet Joseph Smith’s King Follett Discourse: A Six Column Comparison of Original Notes and Amalgamations, with Introduction and Commentary (Provo: Brigham Young University, 1983); Donald Q. Cannon, “The King Follett Discourse: Joseph Smith’s Greatest Sermon in Historical Perspective,” BYU Studies 18 (Winter 1978): 170-192; Stan Larson, “The King Follett Discourse: A Newly Amalgamated Text,” BYU Studies 18 (Winter 1978):

193-208; and Van Hale, “The Doctrinal Impact of the King Follett Discourse,” BYU Studies 18 (Winter 1978): 209-225.

[19] Ibid., 6:305-306.

[20] For an analysis of the Neo-orthodox Mormon concept of God that describes God in more

absolute terms (omniscient, omnipotent, etc.) than traditional Mormonism, see O. Kendall White, Jr., “The Transformation of Mormon Theology,” Dialogue 5:2 (Summer 1970): 9-24; and Mormon Neo-Orthodoxy: A Crisis Theology (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1987).

[21] Mormons do not believe that there was ever a moment when Elohim did not exist. In fact,

Elohim, together with all the other gods and all the children of Elohim (all humanity) have always existed as “eternal intelligences.” But, they do believe that there was a moment when Elohim was not yet a God. See PGP, Abraham 3.

[22] For an analysis of the LDS doctrine of revelation by a Mormon critic, consult George B.

Arbaugh, Revelation in Mormonism, Its Character and Changing Forms (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1932).

[23] The Authorized Version is also known as the King James Version of the Bible. The standard works were canonized by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve and sustained by the Church in conference.

[24] PGP, Articles of Faith 8-9.

[25] Ibid.

[26] Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, Offenders for a Word (Provo: FARMS, 1992),

57-58.

[27] Gospel Principles, 11. For non-authoritative LDS explanations of the pre-existence of man

and the multiple states of man, including the Son of God, see Truman G. Madsen, Eternal Man (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1970); Gilbert Charles Orme, The Four Estates of Man (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1948); and Blake T. Ostler, “The Idea of Pre-Existence in the Development of Mormon Thought,” Dialogue 15:1 (Spring 1982): 59-78.

[28] Ezra Taft Benson, Come Unto Christ (Salt Lake City: Deseret, 1983), 4. See also Bruce R.

McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 2^nd ed. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966), 546-547, 743. For other examples of the use of the term “sired” in LDS literature, see pp. 103-104, fn. 143 herein.

[29] Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual: Religion 231-323, p. 22.

[30] Gospel Principles, 71-78.

[31] Ibid., 115-228.

[32] Ibid., 255-257.

[33] Ibid., 301-305.

[34] Ibid., 294-299.

[35] Ibid., 81.

[36] Ibid.

[37] Ibid.

[38] The LDS Church vigorously protects the secrecy of its temple rites. For general information

about temples and temple activities, consult “Temples” in Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 4:1443-1468.