Having Effective Family Conversations, Pt. 2

Uh You're entering. Outer brightness How can you look upon this end there with such love? Grace overflows my cove. All of my soul and my heart have been revived in you. I'm saddest watch.

Hey, fireflies. Welcome back to Outer Brightness. This week we have the Extreme pleasure of being flies on the wall for a conversation between Michael Flournoy. Michael the ex-Mortiman apologist. and his brother David.

So I'm going to step out at this point. And just kind of keep time, and I'll let them take it away.

Okay, let's go on to the next topic: positive restoration, revelation. Um, I don't have too much to say on Revelation. What would Revelation is up next? Uh, what do you got? What do y'all have against Revelation?

Is there anything that y'all would have against there being Revelation? I mean, I think that if you're gonna say that there is more revelation that God has given us, you have to also be saying. That's what we have already, aka the Bible, is insufficient. I think that's what revelation implies. Because if there is new revelation and it says the same thing that the Bible says, then we don't really need it.

And if it says something new, then that means the Bible is not sufficient, that it's not telling us enough.

So that's my problem in a nutshell with Revelation.

Okay.

So, not necessarily that God would continuously call prophets like He always has, but just that it would, the fact that if He, Does that would circumvent the Bible and make it incomplete? Is that right? Or? Yeah, because here's what happens. And I'll use the LDS Church as an example, but it could theoretically happen with any organization that says we receive continuing revelation.

From God. I mean, you've got the Quran, but at least I think Muslims have cut it off where Muhammad was the last. Prophet, but you've got multiple prophets. And every time you've got a general conference, right? I mean, it didn't even stop at the doctrine and covenants.

Every time you've got a general conference, that is scripture, wouldn't you say? Technically, it's not scripture because it's not been unanimously voted on by the apostles. But it is pertinent and it's something that we would want to listen to. But I think if at any point they said something that is contrary to the scripture that we have, you'd have to say, whoa, what's going on here? And that's why I feel like we can take almost any LDS belief and find at least evidences of it in the Bible.

So, for me, I'm able to justify: hey, this is okay because it points to this or it points to that. Keep going. Yeah.

So it sounds like you sort of have a similar position to me then, that if they said something that was against it. Then, either they would have to be saying something totally new that means that the Book of Mormon Doctrine and Covenants and Pro-Great Price didn't tell the whole story, right? Or they're speaking incorrectly. I mean, I'm kind of curious what your thought would be if they did teach something that was contrary to LDS scripture.

Well, I mean, there have been moments where they have said things that were inaccurate. I mean, the blacks in the priesthood is probably one of the prime examples. And I think it goes down to these are men. They are not perfect. Just like you've taught me, Jonah ran away from Nineveh.

He did not want to go to that city. With the opposite direction. But God was still able to use him. In a positive light. Um I would hope that If there was something different, as they evolved, that they would retract the situation like they did with blacks in the priesthood.

But so you would say that the scripture. Is more of an anchor than the LAS leaders.

So if they say something, and it's not in line with the scriptures. You're going to believe the scripture over the living prophets. I feel like you're right that the scripture does not always tell the full story, but as long as it's not.

something that I believe is contradictory to scripture. And if it's coming from a prophet, I would accept that. If it was something expounding on it, Uh Mike, let's say Doctrine and Covenants, what is it, 132, where they talk about, and this is, I believe, George Albert Smith or Justice Fielding Smith. It's like after regular Justice Smith, they have the vision of Jesus organizing. The missionary force in Spirit Prison.

Well, that was, I believe, delivered. In the general conference, was it not? And then it was added to scripture later.

So, something like that, where, hey, here is a whole chapter talking about Jesus going to the spirits in prison, and here is a revelation expounding on that. Then, for me, hey, this does not necessarily contradict, but it expounds on it. If the same sort of thing happened in, in general conference, I think I'd be happy with that. The thing with prophets and revelation is. Moses was a modern prophet, a living prophet to the people of his time.

Daniel was a living prophet to the people of his time, Jeremiah. Um, and so each time God had a people, there was a living prophet that was giving specific advice to the people of those times. Uh, Daniel telling people, Hey, we need to leave Egypt and cross the Red Sea, has no pertinence whatsoever to his situation, the people in his era.

So, I do believe that prophets do have a place in guiding the fold.

Okay, so one last question, and we're gonna jump into the topic that you and I are the most excited to talk about here. And that is, you know, there's certain things though, you know, that are totally timeless. Um, for example, the gospel, okay, um, and the nature of God. I don't think those things are going to change based on our current circumstances, and I think that's the biggest problem that I have with LDS revelation specifically: is that it goes against what the clear, plain teaching of the Bible is. In fact, the Book of Mormon even.

Contradicts itself because you see some places in there where. It seems to very strongly teach the doctrine of imputed righteousness. And then you find other places. Where it's like they ask a Benedai. Does the law of Moses save us?

And he basically says, you know, no, but yes. Like, if we do not if we do not keep the commandments, we will not be saved.

So, yeah, there definitely seem to be some different signals in there.

So that's my kind of my issue with it. But, anyways, imputation. Let's get into that. Does that sound good? That sounds good.

Okay, let's do this.

So, this has been something that has been kind of a roller coaster for both of us, as we both believe that imputation is true. We don't exactly view it the same way, but I kind of want to hear your.

Well, let me.

So, I came up with a couple of different kinds of righteousness. Um, and I just kind of get your thoughts on each one of them, and then we'll talk about impeded righteousness.

Okay, so the first kind of righteousness that I came up with is enabled righteousness that basically. I think most LDS believe this. This is my position as a Latter-day Saint. Is that grace is an enabling power? In fact, the Bible dictionary really hits this heavy.

Grace is an enabling power that allows men and women. To take hold of eternal life and to do things that they would never be able to do if they were left to their own means. And so basically, it's saying, Hey, God's grace is going to make me stronger.

So that I can keep all of the commandments perfectly. And then I will receive eternal life. What are your thoughts on that particular idea? First off, I do believe in enabling grace. There's a scripture that talks about, you know, come unto me, all ye that are heavy laden, and I shall give you peace.

Take my yoke upon you, for my burden is. Easy and my something is light. But the idea is that you're yoking up with the savior. Um And when I was in seminary, our seminary teacher kind of told us about what happens when. Two cattle or ox are evenly yoked, how much more do you think that they would be able to pool?

And all of us were like, oh, we're pretty smart. One plus one is two, so it's gonna be twice as much. Uh but That if there are two oxen that are evenly yoked, that they're able to do six times the amount of weight that one oxen would have been able to do on its own.

So it's one of those things that seems counterintuitive.

So The idea of taking the Savior's yoke upon you. uh does mean what luke one i believe it's luke 170 I can do all things in Christ Jesus, but it does not mean. That you will be perfect and that you can obtain salvation. I think anyone who has ever tried to be a true follower of Christ and is a believer in Christ and saying, Hey, I have taken Christ upon me. I have his power, his strength.

They are going to become depressed very quickly when they realize that they cannot keep the commandments. They will try and fail. They will repent. They will try. They will fail.

And sometimes they make progress and sometimes they don't. They make progress in one area and they don't in another.

So while enabled righteousness is a true thing, And it can help to do things that you never could do. Like Peter would never have been able to heal the person that was asking for alms outside the temple on his own. That was an enabled righteousness type thing. But no one will be able to have an enabled righteousness to salvation. They will not be able to be perfect.

They will fail over and over again. Yeah.

So, yeah, I agree with you. I mean, I believe in an enabled righteousness too, but not in terms of salvation at all. Like for me, it's more of a sanctification thing that God's going to, well, I mean, not enabled. Righteousness per se, but an enabling grace where, like, God's going to help. Help me to overcome some things in my life.

But yeah, salvation, there's no way, no how. That any of us are ever going to reach perfection or the level that is required to. To obtain eternal life. I mean, the Book of Mormon even is pretty clear on this: that no unclean thing can enter into the presence of God. That was right.

But the Book of Mormon does say similar things. Yeah.

So, you know, if we go to God with our report card and it's an A minus, that's just, it's just not good enough.

Well, it wouldn't be an A minus, to be honest. I mean, God cannot look. At sin with the least degree of allowance, so even if you were you know a monk and you lived celibacy and you know almost never committed a sin, I mean, you call your brother Raka, you're in danger of hellfire. I mean, one sin, you go from a 100 to a zero, you fail. Um so Anyways.

So what if what if your parents name your brother Raka? Then what?

Well. Yes, intense is important. Um what was it with King David? Talks about how he doesn't look on the outside appearance, but he looks on the heart.

So I do feel like it's a good thing that. Christ is our judge because he, LDS perspective, he committed the atonement. He doesn't just know everything through omniscience, but he literally suffered and walked in my shoes in a way that we can't quite understand.

So he knows my intent. Yeah.

So the concept that you were talking about a minute ago, that it drops down to a zero. That comes from James 2, verse 10, by the way, which says, for whosoever shall keep the whole law, And yet, offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

So basically, you know, you mess up in one point, you know. It's an F. Nobody's going to Judgment Day with an A minus. You're going there with an A plus or an F.

So let's talk about the second category of righteousness that I came up with, which is joint righteousness. I've definitely heard a lot of Latter-day Saints say this over the pulpit. I will do my best, and Christ makes up the rest. What do you think about that? Uh I mean this really Joint righteousness.

Has to be imputed righteousness if you really think about it. If joint righteousness is, I am trying my darndest. But I keep failing, but I'm trying. If Christ is giving you, Any of it, he's giving you all of it.

So, I mean, joint righteousness. I mean, we may think that we're doing something, but in reality, the cost of our sins is so much more than anything we could possibly do that it is Christ. Yeah, well, it's kind of funny because we just finished saying, like, you're going to judgment day with an F, and so there's no such thing as a joint righteousness here, like, it is all Christ. Christ, because our part is an F. That's what we accomplish, right?

Yes. Yeah.

Okay.

And even King Benjamin teaches that. He talks about how we're, you know, worthless and profitable servants. And, you know, even if we do. Keep a commandment or we do a good thing, God immediately blesses us and we have been paid, and we are still a worthless and unprofitable servant. Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Even if we should give all the praise and things which our whole soul has power to possess, we would still be unprofitable servants.

So we never can come out of that infinite debt that we owe. And then the third category that I basically came up with is sort of an earned or infused righteousness, I guess, where as we are obedient, God gives us some of his righteousness. But I think that that sort of falls under the same categories as the other two. Where we're never going to get to the point where we've earned all of the righteousness. that we could and my big argument with that has always been That Christ is an infinite being and his righteousness is infinite.

And if he gives us any percentage of that, since infinity can't be divided, he has to give it all. Would you agree with that? I do agree with that.

Okay, so then the only option that is left is imputed righteousness, which means that that righteousness actually comes from. Christ himself. It is a one-time event where you are immediately Clean as if you had done all that Christ had accomplished.

So I think we agree up to that point, right? We do agree up to that point. The differences that we have is when does that righteousness come? Come to you. And for me, the Latter-day Saint position is that when you are baptized, that is when you take upon yourself the name of Christ.

So we are always children of God the Father. Because we're spirit children of him, but we are not children of Christ until we have been baptized and entered into this covenant with him.

So, for me, taking on us the name of Christ, putting on the whole armor of God, at that moment, we have been, all of his righteousness is on us. We are 100% clean and saved in a nutshell. I mean, Paul has talked to me, and Michael's talked to me, and I would say that there probably are exceptions. And I'd like to say that your imputation doesn't happen until you have a come to Jesus moment. But really, I mean, the Bible says that, you know, if you have faith even the size of the mustard seed, Alma says that even if you have a desire to believe, that's all you need.

So I really think that the requirements for For being a Christian and for being baptized is the starting line and That is enough for imputed righteousness for him to give you all of it.

Okay.

So this is a really Really interesting to talk to you about this. And a lot of the things that you're saying, it sounds like exactly the same things that I say.

So it's kind of airy a little bit. But I know that there's a lot of Latter-day Saints who would listen to this, and this is a A new concept for them that they're not really familiar with.

Some are even, like a lot of I talk to online are even opposed to the idea of imputed righteousness.

So, do you think that this really is something that falls in line with LDS doctrine? I do. There's another doctrine that LDS have and evangelicals have, which are Different names, but they're identical. And this is what the primary focus is for the church, and it is the path of discipleship. And that is the same thing as To me, it's the same thing as what evangelicals call sanctification.

So after you've For LDS, after you've been baptized, receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, you now have all of Christ's righteousness on you. When you die, your name, His name is on you, you've been washed clean through the blood of the Lamb, and you will go to the celestial kingdom. I think it's a great point. You wrote an article talking about this with what about the people that we do baptism for the dead for?

Well, they're baptized. Are they able to continue sinning? Oh, they're going to go and hunt their ex-wife or something. They cannot commit sin after they've been baptized. They are, they have the imputated righteousness of Christ put upon them.

And if they accept that, they will go to the celestial kingdom.

So, why is it any different for us in the living world as it is for them? In the other world. And I think we could probably, like, I'm not gonna say that there is a 100%, we will never fall away. But I do think it is very difficult to lose salvation. I know evangelicals would say that you cannot lose salvation.

I would say you would have to completely deny Christ. And if that's the case, did you really have salvation? Um, but I think that would, for me, that would be the point where I'd say, hey, what's what's going on here? Um You just lost two points for presenting the once-saved, always saved doctrine as a Latter-day Saint. Me.

Okay, cool. I lost two points. But the the idea of discipleship and sanctification is that it's a lifelong A process of trying to become more and more like the person that we're following.

So, we're disciples of Christ. We want to be like Christ. We want to forgive like Jesus healed the ear of the the centurion that Was taking him to go get whipped, you know, after Peter chopped it off. We want to have these attributes that we're putting into our life. But not for salvation, but to be more like the one who has saved us.

Okay, so there's two questions that I kind of have. No pressure, by the way, on this. But first of all, I mean, you talked about the imputed righteousness of Christ coming upon us at the moment of baptism. But we know that there are more ordinances beyond baptism. the LDS church.

And let's just talk about the endowment specifically. Because I know with the ceiling, at least you can say, well, that's to be married in heaven. And all that, but is an endowment something that you would say is necessary for us to have righteousness if we've already got the full righteousness of Christ? Absolutely not. And I have preached this from the pulpit.

I've said, what are the things that we needed to be saved? Uh, multiple verses: faith, repentance, being baptized, receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost, enduring to the end. Those are the only things that we need to actually do as a Latter-day Saint to be saved. Heck, screw enduring to the end. Replace it with discipleship.

That's our salvation. We don't, those four things, once we've had imputed righteousness imputed on us, we are naturally going to endure to the end. We are naturally going to be a disciple of Christ. What the temple does has nothing to do with salvation at all, and it has everything to do with what we are doing. In the next world, endowment, and I'm not going to get too much into it, but the promised blessing.

Is that we will be kings and queens.

So that is. A title of leadership that we would then have rather than just being a citizen of heaven. And then exaltation, you are married with your spouse.

Okay, so just to clarify, so somebody who is baptized, receives the Holy Ghost. And then doesn't get married for whatever reason. They are worthy enough to be exalted. They just don't have a spouse. Is that what you're saying?

Yes. And this is where it kind of gets. It gets nice. The actual handbook talks about people that are single in the church. And I'll have to find this, but there was this wonderful fifth hour.

Or third hour Sunday that we had on the fifth Sunday. Were they answered things straight out of the church handbook. And I'm not exactly sure where it's at, but it was addressing this issue. And it specifically said that the church doctrine is people that have not had the opportunity to be married. will have that opportunity.

um in the millennium So if you are 100% worthy. And let's say you have autism. Or you got abused in your first marriage and you were bitter and you had a hard time finding love again. Or you were bald. Or you were bald.

Um There's probably What is it like 30% or more of the population of the adult membership is single?

So, this is something that has been addressed, that there will be every opportunity. Uh For that, even if you die without it, so the living don't actually need the temple at all. Like, if it wasn't for baptisms for the dead, exaltation could still totally happen. In fact, even the dead don't need the temple because. Except for baptism, because all that stuff could be arranged in the Next life, right?

I don't know if I would say, well, it ideally is in the millennium. Um, and that's what the old gospel principles manual talked about. That, and we've talked about this before, too. That LDS position is that after the earth is burned and Christ comes for his millennial reign, that it's not just members of the church that are going to be baptized, but it's going to be any believer in Christ.

So, Paul will be there, Michael will be there. Ideally, I'll be there. Anyone who believes in Christ will be there. Uh and so it says that there will be two Main works going on during the millennium. The first is missionary work and the second is simple work.

And eventually, there won't be missionary work anymore. It will all be temple work. I do feel like after the millennium is completed, and we've had. Everyone's final judgment, yeah. At that point, you've missed the boat, but I mean, there's going to be.

Plenty of opportunity. I don't think that anyone's going to have to worry about going without.

Okay.

Let me move on to my last question about imputed righteousness. We can kind of talk about this, but because it's the main sticking point for us, because obviously, if Christ's imputed righteousness comes to us at faith, then everything that you kind of have been saying about the temple would also be true about baptism. And there's really no need for the LDS church at all. at that point, right? If it comes at faith.

Yeah, if it came at faith, and that's this, that is the point that led you away from the church. If I'm not mistaken, it is because I was pretty much sitting exactly where you are for a while. I just didn't hold on as long, but I was trying to take the position that impeded righteousness occurs at baptism.

Okay, so. Me in my last five or six months as a Latter-day Saint on the exact same page as you. Right now, I'm like, this is, you know, I believe that it comes at baptism. But then, you know, there was a lot of, there's a lot of verses, and we can talk about them, but. I came to believe that that imputed righteousness comes at faith.

And the problem was, I'm like, okay, well, that righteousness includes all the acts of good and keeping God's law that Christ did while he was alive and Jesus was baptized. If the LDS church is true and it's a restoration, he would have gone through all the temple ordinances. And so, why do I need to do that if that righteousness is already imputed to me? And so, yes, that is the main catalyst that had me leave the church and has me staying out of the church. I don't.

Cares much about all the other things. Like to me, this is the gospel of imputation that faith alone saves us. Yeah, I say that his grace is imputed to us, which is infinite. I know you would say that his life is a vicarious ordinance in our behalf. I will say exactly that.

I know, because you have said it exactly to me. Um I would say that He paid the ultimate Price for every sin that could possibly ever be committed in every situation on every Potential world for eternity. And he has paid that price already, and he's given us the grace. As a Latter-day Saint, I don't say that his life is given, like he's lived my life for me, but that he's whatever I've done is washed clean through the blood of Christ.

So for us, we still have to make our own covenants and promises with God. But we are washed through the grace of blood, through his grace.

Okay, so let me talk just about a couple of verses, and you can kind of chime in as you'd like to. But I actually want to go somewhere I wasn't expecting to go. It just kind of popped into my head right now.

Okay, I haven't even really thought about this till right now, but Matthew chapter 3. Baptism of Christ.

Okay.

He's going to get baptized by John, and John protests, right? You're the one who should be baptizing me, right? Correct.

Okay, here we go. And the way Jesus responds to that, this is Matthew 3, verse 15. And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now, for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness. Then he suffered him. And I believe that the LDS position is that he was baptized as sort of a model so that people would know the path that they should take.

Yeah, the connection scripture to that is at the end of second Nephi. Second DeFi is actually a great. one um 31 is a fun one but we're not going to get into that Uh 30. Where the crap is it? Oh, I'm not allowed to say that word on your podcast, am I?

But you are in cult, that's not allowed. Yeah, uh, it is 31, sorry.

So, just kind of going along with that, wherefore I would that you should remember that blah blah blah blah blah, prophet which the Lord showed unto me that we should baptize the Lamb of God, which should take away the sins of the world. And now, if the Lamb of God, he being holy, which our interpretation is perfect. should have need to be baptized by water to fulfill all righteousness. Oh, then How much more need have we to be baptized?

Okay, here it is. And now I would ask of you, my beloved brethren, wherein the Lamb of God did fulfill all righteousness. By being baptized by water.

So this is. Direct question to that scripture, which is interesting because it wasn't written yet. But how did he fulfill all righteousness by being baptized? Knowing not that he was holy, notwithstanding being holy, he showeth unto the children of men that according to the flesh, he humbleth himself before the Father. And witnesses unto the Father that he would be obedient in keeping his commandments.

Wherefore, after he was baptized with water, the Holy Ghost is sent. Basically the LDS position is who did it to keep a command.

Okay.

So I'm just looking at this here, and I'm just looking at the Bible, letting it speak for itself, not putting the Book of Mormon with it. Because I actually think it's a stronger, I think the Bible is stronger on its own without the Book of Mormon, but that's just me. But he says, Suffer it to be so now, for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness. Obviously. Christ was righteous.

He was holy, right? I mean, he's keeping the law, but I would say that this is a A sign that he is doing this as something that he's going to impute to us later. He's doing things so that he can fulfill all righteousness, so that there can be a trade that's going to take place on the cross. He takes our sin, we take his righteousness. This is actually called double imputation.

I don't know if you've heard of double imputation before. It's going to be your new favorite thing, trust me, because you're a Floridoi. But yeah, so we believe that there was a trade there. I want to go. If you have any comments on that, feel free.

There's another verse I want to go to, but I got to find it real quick. Gotcha. I do have a thought about that, but I don't want to derail where you're at right now.

So I'll wait till where you're at.

Okay.

So he's in Matthew 5 here, Jesus is talking about the law and how strict that law is. If you're angry at your brother without a cause, you'll be in danger of judgment. If you look after a woman to lust after her, you've committed adultery in your heart. All these things. And he says, if.

I say unto you, except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter the kingdom of heaven, which was a pretty big deal to that, like to us, we're like, oh, those guys aren't even that impressive, right? But in the culture at the time, that's like saying, hey, unless you're more righteous than the prophet and the apostles. You're not going to enter the kingdom of heaven. It's kind of a big deal.

Okay.

To find this particular verse, it's kind of eluding me at the moment. Oh, that's right.

So, Jesus says, Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets. I came not to destroy, but to fulfill. Basically, I've come to fulfill the law. You know, like he gives the problem: the law is so strict. That nobody can keep it, but he's there to fulfill the law so that it can be kept perfectly, so that that can be transferred to.

Yeah.

So, your thought with that scripture is: this is the entirety of the law, whereas Latter-day Saints take this as this is fulfilling the law of Moses and the law of sacrifice. That after Christ has given his life and his blood, there shall be no more sacrifice.

So there is that difference between our ideology. Uh but I can see where you're coming from.

Well, he says, what does he say exactly there? Think not that I'm come to destroy the law, but to fulfill. Because doesn't he say, Till heaven and earth pass, not one jot or tittle Shall be done away. Until all is fulfilled, right? Isn't that how he puts it?

Matthew 5, I think it's in there somewhere towards the end. While you're looking for that, the main scripture for continued baptism for Latter-day Saints is, it's the famous one. You all know it, it's John chapter 3, his conversation with Nicodemus. Uh I am familiar that evangelical's thoughts on this is that Being born of the water is your first birth, and being born of the Spirit is your come to Jesus moment. But Latter-day Saints view this as.

Being baptized by water and being baptized by the Spirit.

So it says, verse 3: Jesus answered unto him and said, Verily, rarely, I say unto thee, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus said unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter the second time into his mother's womb and be born? And Jesus answered, Verily, rarely, I say unto thee. Except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter in the kingdom of God.

I just can't think that this is talking about entering into your mother's womb or being born at all, because why would he bring it up a second time as a condition? Except you be born of water and the spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. I know that's up for debate, but this is one of the main biblical verses for us. As hey, this is a requirement who wants to see it, and then with both of those born of the water and the spirit to actually enter the kingdom of God. And that, along with some of the other scriptures that are found in the Book of Mormon, specifically 2 Nephi 31, really leads me to believe that this is the moment that.

His righteousness is imputed unto us.

Okay, so first of all, um It never says like. the word baptism. In that whole passage, it says, by the water and of the Spirit. And so I guess the way I would explain that. Is uh he would Say it again as a condition because Nicodemus doesn't get it the first time.

Like he's completely going off into la-la land, right?

Well, I can't fit back in my mother's womb. Jesus, like, look, you don't get it. Let me make it simple for you. You have to be born of water, so you have to be born and of the spirit. Like, there's two, I'm talking about two.

Two births here.

So I think that's why. I mean, I don't think it's really that far-fetched. For him to explain it as a condition, because he's not explaining it as a condition.

Well, it is a condition. It's not you born of the water. The reason he's even mentioning it is to differentiate it from the birth of the spirit. That's why I think that he's saying it there.

Okay.

And I can respect your opinion on that. We can disagree on that, but I can respect you. But let me go to Matthew 5 here. This is starting in verse 17. I finally found it.

I don't know why I was having so much trouble. Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, One jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled. And then in verse 19, he starts talking about whoever therefore Shall break one of these least commandments.

So he is talking about the commandments of God, and that is what he has come to fulfill specifically.

So he is there. To be obedient. I mean, the scriptures say that he became sin who knew no sin. For us, he became sin so that we could become the righteousness of God. Um Just talking about that trade, but Really, where I want to go is You probably already know exactly where I want to go.

And I know while you're going there. My quick rebuttal on this is everything that he says over the next couple chapters through the Sermon on the Mount is specifically referring to they said of old, thou shalt not commit adultery, and then he's saying the higher law. I'm telling, I say unto you, you shall not. Look upon a woman to lust after her. And so, when he's talking to me, when he's talking about the least of these commandments.

It is everything that he is referencing in the old law, the law of Moses, that this is now being fulfilled.

So for me, it's still a differentiation of interpretation.

Okay.

Yeah.

So we definitely do see that very differently. Like, I remember being LDS and thinking God's. updating the law of Moses here. And I don't think he's updating it at all. I think he is showing them.

How strict that law already is. Like, look, we think that the law of Moses, like, well, not necessarily the law of Moses, okay, but he's just showing them what God's law is and what it has been all along. Like, this is what God's standard is. And if you think that you are righteous because you're keeping the law of Moses, like, you don't really truly understand what God's standard is. Like, you know, they've said before that you shouldn't commit adultery, but I'm telling you, this is what the standard is.

If you look at a woman to lust after her, you've committed adultery in your heart. And basically, just showing them what God's standard really is. And I think the best example of this is the rich young ruler going to Christ and saying, What commandment shall I keep? To have eternal life. And so Jesus says, Well, you know, here's what the commandments are.

He says, Oh, I've been doing this my whole life. You know, basically, yeah, I'm keeping the commandments. And then Jesus says, What? Go and sell all that you have and follow me, and you'll have treasure in heaven. And then immediately the young man's convicted, he walks away sorrowing.

And the way I see it is, he couldn't have been keeping all the commandments because what's the first commandment? To love the Lord thy God with all thy heart. Yeah.

And if he couldn't get rid of his treasure to follow Jesus, Did he really love God with all his heart?

So it doesn't actually say whether he ended up doing it or not, just that he walked away sorrowful. But. It was a challenge.

So, I mean, you can't keep every commandment without, as you say, without having love for God. Yeah, well, then immediately after that, the apostle, you know, he says it is easier for a camel to fit through the eye of a needle than for a rich man. To enter the kingdom of heaven, and his apostles are saying, Well, then, who can be saved? And he says, With man, with men, this is impossible, but with God, all things are possible. Again, kind of with that impeded righteousness, you know, you cannot get there.

Without me. You know, you need God to get there. But going into Romans 4 a little bit here, Starting in verse 3, it says, What saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

So it says right there, when Abraham believed God, it counted his righteousness. But he asked this question, and he's obviously talking to a different audience than today, where they believe that circumcision was vital. But the question that he asks them is: Was he counted righteousness before he was circumcised or after he was circumcised? And in this case, it was before. Yeah, so it is before he is obedient to what God tells him to do.

He's already righteous because he believed. And then he says he received the sign of circumcision. This is in verse 11. A seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had, yet being uncircumcised.

So, the circumcision was a seal of the righteousness that he already had. Basically, it was a witness. To that righteousness. And I believe that baptism works exactly the same way. As that.

So pretty clear illustration there. But really, towards the end, is. But it says verse 22: therefore, it was imputed to him for righteousness.

So basically, he staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief. but was strong in faith, giving glory to God and being fully persuaded. What he had promised, he was able also to perform, and therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.

Now it was not written for his sake alone that it was imputed to him, but for us also to whom it shall be imputed if we believe on him. That raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead.

So, just right there, it is tied to believing in Christ when that imputation occurs.

So, along with that, I mean. This is one of those things where I know you like to tie this into baptism. I feel like the ideology that was going on is that they were trying to. Bring circumcision into Christianity. Hey, this was part of the old law.

Let's continue doing this. And they're trying to stop circumcision. Romans, as I understand, each of these books were an epistle to. Uh The people of Thessalonians. The church in Rome, and it's all part of one epistle.

Okay.

Um, I guess all I was gonna say is if we go on two chapters more. They're still talking about I mean, chapter five is talking about being justified in Christ, Adam fell. Chapter six does talk a lot about baptism and becoming a new creature in Christ.

So I do feel like even though circumcision is being nixed, that there is a talk of still following Christ through baptism, specifically verse four. Of Romans chapter six, but uh, we can move on, yeah. Um, sorry, I wasn't saying that we're out of time, I was just trying to figure out how much time we have left for this. Oh, we're there, okay.

So, last comment I'm gonna make on this. If you wanna say one last thing, you can, but uh, I I don't, I think, yeah, he's talking to different people in the different letters, but the gospel is not gonna change based on who he's talking to. Still going to be completely true, and you know, he in, I think righteousness is only imputed to us one time, and I think you would agree with that. I do agree with that, and so if it's happening at faith, like he says here in Romans chapter four. Then it cannot be at baptism, also.

And I think for him to follow up with baptism later and talk about it, it's got to be the sanctification process, which occurs afterwards. And this is just one of those points where we disagree. I am just going to read this real quick, and then that'll probably much be my ending. Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death. That, like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we should walk in the newness of life.

So I think just talking about walking in that newness of life is we are 100% clean at that point. That's just my belief that fits in with LDS theology. If I 100% agreed with you, I'd be Protestant.

So we can disagree. Ultimately, I think anyone that's listening, I think we both made our points, but that's between them and God to whatever they decide to do.

Okay, sounds good.

So let's move on to our final topic here. And this is finally a topic that we haven't rehashed a million times. I think we've started talking about it once and then said, let's save it for the podcast. But being heirs of God.

So I just want to read the passage here in Romans chapter eight. Verses sixteen and seventeen. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our Spirit that we are the children of God, 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. Have a look.

Thought on this a whole lot, but it kind of caught my eye the other day. I was reading this and I was like, wow, it says that if we're children, then we're heirs. And uh The first thought that jumps into my head is: well, aren't we all children of God in LDS theology? Yeah, that's where you go to verse 15. It talks about the spirit of adoption.

Um So for me, that's talking about Well, I don't know. Keep going. Keep going. No, no, no. I mean, that's exactly where I was going to go, too, because I know that Mosiah.

In Mosiah, it says that. Christ spiritually begets us when we When we come to so, like, we become children of Christ. And I'm pretty sure that any Latter-day Saint is going to believe that that is the point. where we become children of god like it's talking about that and I'm not going to argue that point because I.

sort of believe similar similarly I um I don't believe that Christ Himself adopts me. I just say God adopts me to be a son. Um So, yeah, I'm okay with that up to that point.

So I guess You know, you mentioned earlier that we become children of Christ. When we are baptized. Uh my position Is that we are children of God when we believe. in him And uh And so, I guess it just kind of goes along with the same, it really follows imputation really closely because. If we're heirs of God.

Again, Do we need temple ordinances?

So here's my thought. I so Christ and the church are often considered as The bridegroom and the churches, the bride. He's going to going to marry the church sort of thing. And so I really like the marriage analogy. Uh for me.

Face. Is our relationship like? Me and my wife, we had a relationship, we loved each other. before we got married. Um Otherwise Why are we getting married?

Um but we are not legally. Married, and she does not take my name until we actually are married.

So for me, having faith in Christ. It is the most important thing. But we haven't been married to him yet until we're baptized. And I feel like that's probably the best analogy to describe imputation, adoption. All the fun stuff is just Yes, there is a relationship.

That relationship is the most important thing. But you have to be married. Uh otherwise you're living in sin. Um For my Point of view is: yes, we have a wonderful relationship with Christ, and that leads us to seal the deal through baptism. That's our ordinance.

Um Yeah. But the analogy that the scripture uses here is adoption. I mean, that's what it's talking about in. Uh In Romans 8, right, is the adoption of sons whereby we cry, Abba, Father. And so I want to keep it to the adoption because Um I believe that it's God that adopts us.

You know, it's not us adopting God. But I kind of want to go to John chapter one here. Because I do believe that it's at belief that we are children of God. It says right here, but as many as received him. To them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.

Which were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

So it's God's will that is. causing us to be Born again. To receive that adoption of sons, and it occurs at belief. And I think that if it happens at baptism, I mean, you make the choice. to be baptized and it's something that you are doing to Make that adoption happen.

And I think that becomes the will of man at that point.

So Along the same lines, like I don't think I know anybody. I'm sure there are experiences. Paul's probably the. Perfect example of Pretty much. Being pulled into Christianity.

But for the most part, I feel like we. Are we seeking a relationship with God? We feel like there's something missing. From our lives, and we start turning to the scriptures, we start turning to prayer, we start turning to the pastors or the missionaries, and so they're whether it's baptism or it's Searching and seeking, I feel like there is something that leads to belief. You don't just suddenly one day.

Believe for 98% of the population, I feel like there is study, there is questions, there is prayer. Um So I don't I have a hard time. feeling like Yes, it is God that that That brings you to it. But I feel like that's more of him answering your prayers. Um otherwise it's It goes to the 144,000.

From other face, I'm not. I guess I already did. Anyways, where these are the only ones that are going to be saved, but everyone else, you'll probably still be happy if you believe. Oh, it's like God dictating who's saved. What are your thoughts on that?

Well, so I'm looking at Romans 8. Verse 7 and 8 too. It says, Because the carnal mind is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be, so then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. Jesus also says elsewhere in scripture. No man can come unto me except the Father draws him.

So I don't think that we are capable. of choosing Christ without God making the first The first move. You know, it's not us willing ourselves to. to have that faith. I think that he's the one that Cortes.

In a way. Um But uh But yeah, so it goes here too. It basically says in verse 14: for as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. And I think even Latter-day Saints have to agree that nobody gets baptized except the Spirit is leading them. Right.

I do agree with that.

And so, if they're being led by the Spirit of God, according to Romans 8:14, they must be sons of God. And according to verse 17, if you are children, then heirs. And so they must be heirs of God before they go into the waters of baptism.

So I'm just rereading it. That's okay. Take your time. You know, it's interesting that you talked about the. The flesh and enmity.

I mean, that's almost a. There's a scripture in the The Book of Mormon that pretty much says the exact same thing: the natural man is an enemy of God and always will be until he becometh. Saint through the atonement of Christ, sort of thing.

So, I mean, very, very similar doctrines in the Bible here and the Book of Mormon. Yeah.

Honestly, I hadn't really thought much about children of God. Uh Throughout My mission and stuff like that. I had always thought of this scripture as a very interesting scripture. To say, hey, we are children of God and What's it like if you're a puppy? And you have a dog, and the dog has a puppy, that puppy's gonna grow up to be like that dog.

And so I thought this was kind of an interesting way to say: hey, we will be able to inherit the celestial kingdom. We'll be like our Heavenly Father, being children of God. There is one script verse in the scripture that does kind of. It changes it a little bit. It does give the LBS an out.

And it just says, if so be that we suffer with him. And I feel like we can. tie that scripture to Matthew chapter 3, where he says, Suffer to be so now, for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness. I mean, what does it mean to suffer with him? I mean, obviously, we are not going to get up on the cross.

We're not asked to be whipped. I mean, we're told, and I believe it's Isaiah that with his stripes we are healed.

So, I mean, Oh. A lot of these things we're not supposed to do with him. But it does say That we suffer with him. And I don't know what that means. I mean, I know there's one time when I was on my mission.

And I was on my bike, and my companion was right behind me. It's pouring down rain. The streets in Fresno did not have great Drainage.

So, as the cars drove by, we're getting tidal waves of nasty, dirty water. And there was a guy in the street that just started pointing at us, yelling at us, and he threw a Dr. Pepper can at me. And uh My first thought was, man, if I wasn't a missionary, I could drink that. But my second thought.

was Jesus has suffered worse. And I had that feeling that I was suffering with him. I was suffering for his name.

Sorry, I don't mean to cut you off. No, no, I'm not sure. I'm actually really glad that you mentioned the second part of that verse because I do have some thoughts on that, too.

So there's basically Two statements that are made. And I know I've said this to you, but I'm gonna go a little further. He says, if we're children, then we're heirs.

So that's statement one. Statement two: If so be that we suffer with him. And I think that suffering is a natural result of being a child of God. Because if it is if it is not If both statements are not always simultaneously true, then one of them is a lie. unless both have to be true.

By default. And what's interesting is the next verse, verse 18, he says, For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.

So he's writing Romans. to the believers. And here in verse 18, he is assuming. that they are suffering. Because they are believers, and especially at this time, bro, as you know.

The Romans are hunting down Christians and they are killing them. for no other reason Except that they are Christian. Right. Mm-hmm. And Jesus tells his disciples, if you are of the world, The world would love you as its own.

But because I have chosen you, yep, but because I have chosen you out of the world. The world hates you. But yeah, we totally both agree that the prosperity gospel is. Bad news.

So that's good at least. But yeah, I do think that it is. a total natural Part. of being a child of Of God means that there will be suffering. that is going to come From that, but I think the the statement here Seems to stand by itself.

If we are children of God, then we are heirs. And all those who are led by the Spirit are the sons of God. And so. Just, I guess, my concluding statement. And you can have the last word on this.

is that The Spirit of God is leading me. I believe in Christ. The scriptures say that no one can call Jesus the Christ but by the Holy Ghost. And so By the Bible itself, I am left to believe that I am an heir. Yeah.

And because of that, I I feel no need to return back to the LDS church or Or look at it too seriously because it says here that the spirit is all I need. Gotcha. I mean, I love my savior as well. I mean, I don't know where I'd be without the confidence that. that he's got my back and Front and everything.

I am grateful to hear. uh your your testimony and your faith i mean it it does me good I think after hearing about you leaving the church, I was worried that, like so many others, you were going to be just away from God in general.

So the fact that you are with God makes me happy. From my Latter-day Saint perspective, whether you are a member of the church, Or not, if you are a believer in Christ, you will be around during the thousand-year millennium of Christ. If I'm right, I have no reason to worry about you or Paul because you'll be there. And even if you're not alive during the millennium and you die and you're in spirit prison. And all of a sudden, two missionaries come up to you and start preaching the plan of salvation.

I mean, then, I mean, I don't have any doubt in my mind that if I'm right, that you will be saved. I don't think there's any issue with me saying that, yes, my brother is gonna be in a celestial kingdom, Paul is gonna be in the celestial kingdom. I don't worry about you guys at all. And I don't really. Worry about you either, but it's for different reasons.

I did worry about everybody in the family a lot, just to be honest. I do believe that Latter-day Saints can be Christian, that they can be heirs of God, and they can be born again, and all of that. But I do believe that it's a false gospel, and I don't believe that a false gospel can save. And so the reason I don't worry is because I've just kind of come to a place where I'm like, I trust God to, you know, to work everything out. But I do hope for people in the family.

I don't worry, but I hope. I hope just for everyone in the family to have a complete and utter trust in Christ, not to have any distractions, you know, to believe fully and to believe in the true gospel. And obviously, you and I have disagreements on that, but yeah, I do hope for things in the future. And that's just me being honest. It's not me trying to be mean or anything like that.

Sounds like we both have a very similar thing. We trust that God's gonna. To take care of it. Yeah.

Yep.

Well, bro, thank you so much for coming on the podcast and talking to me. If nothing else, I just hope that this is a lesson because I know that so many people leave the LDS church and then they have no relationship with their family afterwards. And I hope that this is just something that shows people: one, that it's possible, and maybe how you can talk to family members where you don't have to ruin it. You know, I think there's definitely a place. I mean, nobody in the family.

has disowned me. You know, I still have a I still have just as good a relationship with everybody as I did before. And it's not because I'm like pretending that I don't have beliefs. I mean, I think everybody in the family knows what I believe because a certain somebody in our family shares all my posts to their Facebook wall. What do we What?

But yeah, I mean, do you have any closing thoughts on, I guess, that kind of thing? Like, if somebody leaves the church, like maybe other Latter-day Saints, like, How to respond to that? Yeah, you know, people leave for a number of reasons. I would say that my first thing is. Just not to assume anything.

I mean, I don't know how many times I've talked to somebody or heard from. Members that have left the church in different forms that people assumed that they just wanted to sin or that it was easier to be outside of the church. I mean, you don't know why somebody's left. And I think the best thing that you can do as a member of the church is just to talk with them and say, hey, I don't know, like, what was it that? Uh oh.

Oh, okay. Honest conversation where you're seeking to understand where they're coming from without necessarily trying to bring them back. I mean, I would love it if Michael came back, but I I am not gonna try to force him. I mean, I'm sure he's backed me into several corners today that if he wanted to, he could have dug down deep, but I think just don't assume anything. We thank you for tuning into this episode of the Outer Brightness Podcast.

We'd love to hear from you. Please visit the Outer Brightness podcast page on Facebook. Feel free to send us a message there with comments or questions by clicking send a message at the top of the page, and we would appreciate it if you give the page a like. We also have an Outer Brightness group on Facebook, where you can join and interact with us and others as we discuss the podcast, past episodes, and suggestions for future episodes, etc. You can also send us an email at outerbrightness at gmail.com.

We hope to hear from you soon. You can subscribe to the Outer Brightness Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Cast Box, Google Podcasts, Pocket Cast, Podbean, Spotify, and Stitcher. Also you can check out our new YouTube channel and if you like it, be sure to lay hands on that subscribe button and confirm it. If you like what you hear, please give us a rating and review wherever you listen and help spread the word. You can also connect with Michael the X Mormon apologist at fromwatertowine.org, where he blogs and sometimes Paul and Matthew do as well.

Music for the Outer Brightness podcast is graciously provided by the talented Brianna Flornoy and by Adams Rode. Learn more about Adams Road by visiting their ministry page at Adamsroad Ministry dot com. Stay bright, Fireflies. To whom shall we go? You have Uh Words of eternal life.

And we Be happy. And have come to know That you are Uh The holy Of God, the word made flesh, the risen sun. Heaven and earth will pass away. But the word of the Lord endures forever. All this world is indecay.

But the word of our God through ages remain, Lord, you promised that we, as your church, would remain upon this rock, and the gates of hell would not prevail. Against us, 'cause you have power to keep your word unspoiled and purity. Heaven and earth will pass away, but the word of the Lord endures forever. All this world is in decay. But the word of our God through ages remain as the rain calls down from heaven and waters the earth, bringing it light.

So the word that goes out from your mouth will not return empty, but does What you desire, Lord. We hear your word and believe in you. Heaven and earth will pass away, but the word of the Lord endures forever. All this world has indeed But the Word of our God through ages remain of God remains.