Share This Episode
Outer Brightness  Logo

The Apostles’ Creed (Things LDS Hate Series: Creeds)

Outer Brightness /
The Truth Network Radio
February 27, 2022 12:57 pm

The Apostles’ Creed (Things LDS Hate Series: Creeds)

Outer Brightness /

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 169 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


February 27, 2022 12:57 pm

Do Latter-day Saints hate the creeds of historic Christianity? Do they have their own creed? What about the Apostles’ Creed, which historian Philip Schaff has called the “creed of creeds”? Justin S. Holcomb in his book Know the Creeds and Councils has written, “Perhaps more than any other profession of faith, the Apostles’ Creed has expressed the essentials of Christianity in a way that Christians of all stripes can rally around.” Could Mormons agree with each article of that creed without hesitation? We discuss these things and more in this episode.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Renewing Your Mind
R.C. Sproul
Core Christianity
Adriel Sanchez and Bill Maier
Running to Win
Erwin Lutzer
Core Christianity
Adriel Sanchez and Bill Maier
Running to Win
Erwin Lutzer

As we mentioned earlier, the Mormons will often claim that they don't have credits, but given the definition of creed that we could've been discussing tonight of today have clearance payments. Example of a creed. Although maybe it's not as distinguished from has more authority than we believe that Crete should have, is able is revealed from God that thing so Mr. Scripture. They have right is negative deity of Scripture is God's word so they've elevated the 13 articles of things in Scripture as we would to level Scripture is confessing super music superscripts super creed. When is a level Scripture your fireflies. Welcome back to our brightest podcast Matthew Dyer reported for the first time in several months. We've tried to get together a few times over the last several weeks, but I've had to push it out and reschedule a number of times due to some trips that I had to take and so scheduled or catching up. It's been a while since we've talked. So Matthew. Lots of changes in your life since we spoke late last year. You have what was the biggest change I just share that with the with our listeners. Well, I'm pretty sure that my wife would be starting the papers.

I told her that my job as things change so I record about that but I think I mentioned at some point that you so last December we got married. It was on her third anniversary of her first date so dating for three years thing I married my third anniversary so I was last month is good to my family file New York and then also say mother graduated from school. Some polygamous goalies for now. Who knows what the future may may bring, and then start a new job so long. Changes all at once, but some of that my apartment so I left my family of squirrels is no longer living with me the Fed to relocate and find their own place and I'll move out on their own Siam so got a place I moved out west yet to Idaho, but we will soon changes all once for sure you and you and Rebecca met at church great yeah we met at only Baptist in the wall outside Albany New York ice teacher actually artificially periodic table of reformed theologians.

Although some people here that are technically reformed like Martin Luther does not technically reform he probably get upset if you label them as a reformed theologian, yet I can't read well spent as precise like what you think. You get upset if you label them reformed well, I mean there's the whole controversy was mainly right, he said he said you are of a different spirit regarding the Lord's supper so to be done in the same in the same cage on the family when I like that but you have what's new and I believe you mentioned before were talking that you got a couple trips I went on vacation on a cruise or something. Yeah, yeah, my wife and I went on a cruise to the Bahamas got back last, but we can go this past Friday and was a fun trip.

We went down and down to Florida flew down there spend the night in the hotel and then took a bus over to the pier at Port Canaveral on the response to be a rocket launch that day.

Company called Astra was launching their first rocket but end up getting delayed and made.

Finally, I did end up launching it. I think the next day were couple days later but we didn't get to see it.

Unfortunately, but it was a fun trip.

We went to Nassau in the Bahamas and also an island called Bimini and spent a couple days on the beach there with the beautiful blue water just had a good time together.

So is funny. Colleges are dog folks.

I'm not sure what's gotten into a legally his newer dog we got couple weeks before Christmas and rescued him and his his little golden European is the one those that barks and dips everything and there were some neighbors outside with the kids writing some of those like motorized vehicles that can get for your kids, and that was that had him going crazy couple hours ago, but that's over now.

But he continues to go on and on with his parking tonight so hopefully keep me here with me, I'll stay quiet but prior prior to the going on the cruise. In fact the right the week right before we left on the cruise travel down to Georgia. My uncle passed away. He had gotten coded and in the pneumonia following coded and was hospitalized for a time and then none of us succumbed to the pneumonia and so sad times for that got got to grandma George and visit with my cousins and see my dad my sister. They flew in from Utah and my brother Flint in Texas for the funeral. So it was good to reunite with family, but which was under different circumstances. For sure answer to that. So as I get my camera again or if you're yeah was a little rough on that's my uncle that I've talked about on the podcast previously sent semi-bad placard with the great prologue on it that hung in our house and talk about how important that was in my thinking about who God is and who Christ is and now, comparing and contrasting that with with Mormon beliefs about who Christ is and so yeah, tough to see him past, but grateful that he's now with the Lord meant Pegasus note that every Christian should have a think too often we want to stay here as long as we can because we forget about what's coming next. Right there sweet, so sorry about your loss. So there was a post of yours that I wanted to ask you about actually report up through quick when nothing heretical.

I don't think so. So it was the one that you talked about the line in God's Army post is a couple days ago. He said that as a young man preparing for your earliest mission you clung to the line in the film God's Army were the character says of the truthfulness of the obvious church paraphrase."

It's like God gives you 100 reasons to believe one reason not to believe that he can choose and that resonated with you, he said, looking back your your thinking on that has changed is almost like God gives you 100 reasons not to believe in the obvious faith in one reason to believe what made you think about that recently and I think was discussed. Sometimes just thoughts and memories can all come up any starting on the mission and that was I watched a lot of it all. The horde have them as I watch, but I watched God's Army lawn preparation gotten the best years thing is on and reparation for my mission is excited.

You not going to Europe and preaching the gospel which I thought was gospel ends and so adjusting my mission times. You know I got about you, but just ask the mission pop up. You know, just people that I matter events happen and I just remember that movie and I thought about it and I thought about that lying is a light really stuck out to me the time because you know you hear about you know what things are. Controversially, all Blacks and the priesthood or polygamy or things like that so it's time as I can on Thursday. These little things here and analyzed as grammatically said flecks of history things are cut from that account for you often felt like that's got just testing her feet because it was 100% true and there is no controversies it be so easy to believing on that's kinda how I rationalized within you know just looking back on it.

It's like well I mean when you're given a very limited set of data that's what it feels like in all looking back is lacing again, a very little limited set of data in terms of history in terms of biblical understanding and auctioning of passages in the history of how the church is understood surpassed just it's like if you given all that, you just keep the blinders on. Yeah make sense fixable sense, and then you know the polygamy and like why can Blacks of the priest to make and 78. Others are not.

Not a big deal can think but then once you start thinking about all that. I mean one book of building on Mike and Jimmy frequented on previous podcasts is Jaroslav Pelikan he's a Lutheran scholar is really great series things a five part series goes about the development of Christian doctrine or the Christian doctrine is in all been developed or refined over over the centuries, and it's and I think it's fascinating rather than disconcerting as I thought is, is not yet seen is no. Yes, I wanted everything sure and certainly have everything fixed, everything figured out. And so if there's any kind of change or debate that means that you don't you don't have the true church lesson and I was looking back I find it fascinating. Now that there is always debate that Christians have been try to figure out what God really meant in his word when he when he revealed it so we look back your time. You see, all start running my people through timely care and ANS and Ignatius and they make these very early statements you like, second, third century there very very poignant and very they point towards a Trinity and now things that we set all you know those. Those are the developers of years later, but you find very clear statements about the divinity of Christ, always other teachings you find wow there's so much great history here in the Christian tradition and so then all those reasons that you find in your district for why there is a supposed apostasy kind of melt away so that rambling but is just you find the more you learn about Christmas release. I think in and in a biblical manuscripts and things like that is not scary. It's fascinating to me and yet I think it enriches our face to know that you know that the church has has Dr. controversies in and trials and accountings into our topic today.

I guess as if my good segue. So fireflies today do not talk about the apostles Creed. It's the next installment in our series of things that Mormons hate which we got a lot of hatred for that.

That title will meet Bob publish our first episode in a serious effect becoming standby. There are things that that that Mormons hate and it may be a little bit of a strong term but but there are things that Mormons are averse to just because of the way that their theology points to another. Having been a great apostasy and that there is a restoration of true New Testament Christianity and that everyone else is not as in apostasy, and so there's things that that about historic Christianity that Mormons are averse to so that's that's the whole idea behind the series in one of those things is is Creed Senso method I thought we would discuss some of the more important creeds and a series of episodes in this boomerang talk about the apostles Creed soap quick intro Matthew Brown when I was a young latter-day St. had a similar your post. When I was a missionary in particular on there were couple of books that I read that were important to me in an important to me especially in a time of a Mormon mission is really really at time of formation for young latter-day Saints.

You really kinda come into your own. You step out of your comfort zone and you go out into the world to preach the LDS version of the restored gospel and you you kind of stepping out into unfamiliar territory left sky stand on your own 2 feet and your own testimony of the LDS church and for me it was a period of of questioning and try to figure out what do I believe, do I actually believe these things I've been taught up until the 19th year of my life when I went out to be an obvious missionary of the two books I read were first is a small little book, barely more than a pamphlet called our heritage and it was it was meant to be a kind of like a primer of LDS Church history touching on the highlights kind of the more important aspects of LDS Church history, especially early LDS Church history. I remember there was a big push when it was released, I think it was, it might've been studied as part of the Sunday school curriculum or or even the elders Cormorant was cited quickly, my Kimber which I think it was studied for year and one of those settings, so there is a big push from under read SRI read the laws in the MTC and then later in my mission.

I got a hold of the LDS Institute, manual, church history in the fullness of times, which is a much fuller treatment of LDS church history book is that the titles of those two books our heritage in church history in the fullness of times kind of give highlights the fact that the firm for Latter Day Saints.

When we talk about or when we did talk about church history be largely meant the events from the restoration through Joseph Smith. Onward we we didn't really view much of what happened prior to 18, 20, is important rating 20 being the year that the justness was supposed had had his first vision experience so anything that happened prior to that was part of the great apostasy and was not really considered important and certainly wasn't wasn't covered in church history in the fullness of times but light of those books were important to me and as I was as I was leaving the LDS faith. A decade after my mission. I made a post on Facebook about how I felt that now that I had left the LDS statement kind of decided that in my mind.

I no longer believed in a great apostasy. The way that Latter Day Saints teaches that all of Christian church history was mine that had become my heritage. Whereas before my heritage was just those things that the LDS church operates in 20 on and so my heritage became the whole of the Christian tradition like your talk about Jaroslav Pelican's books and I also got the series and began to read them. And so my heritage included all of all of Christian history, including the historic creeds and confessions of the Christian church there's a there's a podcast that's done by looking your ministry semester if you listen to the nonactive is called five minutes in church history is hosted by Dr. Stephen Nichols and I and I love the intro to the podcast because it describes the podcast as quote where we take a little break from the present to go exploring the past travel back in time as we look at the people and events, and even the places that have shaped the story of Christianity. This is our story, our family history and so that's that's really the way I felt after I left the LDS church is that all of Christian history was mine that was my new heritage that includes kind of Christian creeds like the apostles Creed a Margarita quote from JI Packer. It's in this little book that I have.

I picked it up at apologetics conference and bowl a few years ago to try to get in focus for you. My Mike at my work after death. So it's called know the creeds and councils for just a little primer on major Christian creeds and ends confessions so in the introduction and biblical from JI Packer from the service a book or an article is called upholding the unity of Scripture today. He says quote tradition is the fruit of the Spirit's teaching activity from the ages as God's people have sought understanding of Scripture is not infallible, but neither is it neither is it negligible and we impoverish ourselves. If we disregard it." Anything that kinda goes to what you were saying earlier Matthew that is not perfect. There are debates and there are discussions about Christian doctrine throughout the centuries, and it's not doesn't mean that it's in apostasy right.

We talked about before on the podcast that the New Testament Ephesians 4 kinda it's a passage that Latter Day Saints quote a lot you know about what the structure of the church needs to be apostles and prophets and all that but that passage itself kind of presupposes that there's going to be some sense of disunity within the faith until we all come to a unity of faith right is the way the set with his written so it doesn't mean that it's in apostasy. If there conversations and discussions and debates that go on within Christian doctrine, but that kinda leads us to some questions about the apostles. Before we jump into those method you want to have any say in the way of introduction or any thoughts you might want to share at this point are enough so the first question I want to discuss with Davis is that Mormons will often say that they don't have any creeds. What does the word create mean yet Creed just comes from the Latin credo to believe so anytime he asked somebody okay what is it you believe any say why believe this. You're basically giving, like a verbal verbal Creed. In a sense, but I guess in a more historical sense Creed is more formal than that. I guess it's something that's not just you know off the cuff.

It's more something is kind of been accepted more broadly by one or more churches. So that's kinda usually what works, preferring to recover creeds, but so LDS or against any of creeds. Well, I mean there's the very obvious credo that the 13 articles of faith. I guess there is there is kinda one major difference with that though is that Joe Smith had and what will we have some quotes from him.

He kind of you creeds as something that shackle people down something that was like, you know, that was something that you couldn't change the absolutely had to accept or else everything my way or the highway, and you know you couldn't budge them or change of it all was. I think eating of the 13 articles of faith are probably more flexible that way. Where if the LDS church leaders were to say well or to change article number eight you know they be fine with that. Whereas no one's going back and changing the apostles Creed in on the verge of that. Maybe that's the subtle difference where you think Joseph Smith got his view of creeds. Yeah something about that about his history. I think it's it might just be due to the fact that he did.

My conflict denies family life was cut tumultuous you had in his parents marriage is not know this pristine idyllic marriages at sometimes perpetrating know it seems like his father. At one point had trouble with alcohol you had trouble with money constantly.

You know you get a bad sales deals. I remember going through the rest of rowing we had the steel where he was known there were to invest the money into this business and the columns fell through, so that what they are causing problems and there's also religious problems. Dad was more of a Universalist and his mom was more about no reformed Presbyterian is a maybe it's just the idea that you know these creeds create lines in the sand in the crate division in a house trying to think of why specifically, he would going as creeds, but that's Just what I was speculating thinking about what I you as have you thought about that or have any insight on yeah I think if you look at the first account of Joseph Smith's first vision does the currently accepted account the limits officially accepted by the LDS church is the 1838 version of of the first vision and that one actually does have the camera is is a God or Jesus Christ and in the vision that that tells him that that all the churches are correct that they draw new to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me talks about the creeds being corrupt. Yes, you have that language put into into the mouth of of of God and if you look at the first 1832 version of boot. The first vision you don't really have that kind of anti-creedal language. I was looking in teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, the stewardess said there mother said there about creeds and there is a quote that I think you have brought it up earlier Matthew will miss if I can pull it up real quick. It's on page 327 of the addition that I have is at the blue one. It's actually the red 11. So in check, but my it's holding my WebCam I know, but this is from since some comments that he had made in 1843, which is close to the year that he was murdered, but he said I cannot believe in any of the creeds of the different denominations because they all have the same things in them. I cannot subscribe to. Though all of them have some truth. I want to come up into the presence of God and learn all things but the creeds set up stakes and say hello to shop.com and no further which I cannot subscribe to sewing as a sort of anti-creedal sentiment. Both the 1838 version of his first vision and there in 1843. That's the only quote that at least by the index in the teaching of the Prophet Joseph Smith touches on creeds. There are other statements that he makes with regards to the Trinity. Specifically, that in in that book, but I think you know it's important to note that that Mormonism kind of doesn't come about in a vacuum that it kinda rose up in a very specific historical time in the United States and there was already a quote on quote restoration movement that is been going on for a number of decades in the United States and the church that I want to actually trace its history back to that restoration movement, and that's no through Alexander Campbell, and Barton W Stone, Walter Scott, some of the early prominent Latter Day Saints who came out of that movement are Sidney Rigdon and Parley P.

Pratt, among others, and Alexander Campbell and his father were Scottish Presbyterians and his father came here on a preaching team came here to America to accept a preaching position at a Presbyterian Church and right before his father left her monument after his father left Alexander Campbell in Scotland. If I recall correctly, Hedda had a disagreement with the way the Presbyterians were handling communion.

I think it was done on a quarterly basis and you had to have a communion coin. Basically that was meant to bet that you would present to affirm that you are in good standing within the Presbyterian Church and so you only get the coin from trust to administer and so on. They didn't have open communion and that and Alexander Campbell disagreed without a stream is one of his had a first disagreements that he had with Presbyterianism and so separately. His father's here in America and and having his own difficulties with the Presbytery here that he was responsible to and kind of drafted up of document called the declaration and address which basically declares his church to be separate from the Presbytery and so that was kind of the beginning of their separation from the Presbyterians they eventually when Alexander Campbell came with the rest of the family over to America they eventually landed for a time with with Baptists, but then fell out with them as well and then kinda became their own independent movements that that kind of restoration movement as they merged with other groups that were doing similar things out of Presbyterianism what Barton W Stone in Kentucky that was that was growing throughout the 18 teens in 1920s and actually Alexander Campbell from 1823 1829 while he was associated with the with the Baptists. He wrote a note and a periodical called the Christian Baptist a series of 32 articles that were entitled, the restoration of the ancient order of things. So these ideas of great apostasy.

These ideas of restoration design. These anti-creedal ideas, but they were all part of that broader restoration movements. I think it's interesting to note about Joseph Smith in particular that you begin to see the anti-creedal kind of stuff, creep in more and more as they move into Ohio and into the kind into the heart of where that broader restoration movement had been successful in Ohio and Kentucky and Missouri and so is a bit integer to get converts from that broader restoration member converts who were more drawn to the more as we talked I was student Banneker the more hostile aspects of of the early latter-day St. movement when compared with the Alexander Campbell kind of Baconian reasoning side of the restoration movement that's when you start to see more of the anti-creedal language from Joe just messed up and it's interesting just to know from a historical standpoint that it fits squarely within that broader anti-creedal restoration movement as great to get that back on site. Do you think I am getting out dissent tended to include people into his inner circle holding on kind of bounce ideas off of them, or get ideas from them. I can think of. It was pretty well that was the accusation I think of against city rig and the jicama came up just the idea of the two tiers of priesthood and there is after he joined the spelling in 1838 and 31 something like that that that's when you know that he was criticized for four is David Witmer right that said that he said well it was Sidney Rigdon the count. This idea of the two priestess status and can have an idea bringing new people into his group and the neo-bouncing ideas off of them getting ideas of eating or someone in particular that the mind of you know, kind of pushed in that direction of it going anti-creeds, not automobile. She's going to try to look into him on the second pivot on a person right now. I just think it's interesting that in his earliest accounts of those as religious experience in the first vision minute to 32. You don't see it but then later on you do see it is there and in those areas of the country where the restoration movement was more entrenched was also during a time 1938 was around the time when he starting to get opposition from people like William wall right there talking on all sides were kind of questioning his authority in his, his calling as a prophet. So if you can can make a stronger case against you know the creeds of other churches like to build your case up in terms of your authority asked that I assume when you were when you were latter-day St. Matthew will will is your view of creeds to review anti-creedal I see see on Facebook Latter Day Saints that are still very anti-creedal. Did you have strong feelings about the creeds of Christianity when you are Latter Day Saints general. No, I did remember the first time ever read the Athanasian Creed was what is reading Mormon doctrine fibers are cocky, I think he just quoted verbatim and in his book the first time ever read. And as I DOESN'T make any sense enough. But that's kind only really exposure it had to creeds and then later on I rented to the apostles Craig McCann. There's nothing really that offensive.

In it, so gets me out of there was a specific creeds. I was like really gung ho again. Psychosis. Blasphemy is apostasy uses Conroy and does only make sense to me by you that I don't think I did I mentioned before that my dad was a convert to Mormonism, so she came from a background where in their church there Lutheran Church.

They did read the apostles Creed as part of their their weekly liturgy and so she didn't have didn't have a strong anti-creedal bent to him with regards to the apostles Creed. But when it came to the Athanasian Creed he did and you know it's the definition Creed confused eminence part of what Kenneth drew him to Mormonism and then the view of God that that Mormonism has and he and I had a conversation about that, even after we had both left the LDS church. He was still really struggling with the idea of the Athanasian Creed, but for myself.

I do other than just hearing my dad talk about those two creeds. I didn't really have deep thoughts about the creeds. I think you know we would read portions of Joseph Smith's history that the official version 1838 version where like we said that the the anti-creedal sentiment is displaced kind of into the into the mouth of God and I don't thing I really thought too deeply about about that. It was more just, like, okay, that's just kind of a general statement about the overall apostasy of of Christendom. I didn't think of specific creeds of men and onto like maybe in the MTC. I read the articles of faith and in the great apostasy by Talmage and that he kinda gets more into that anti-creedal sentiment and in those books. Then I tended to get maybe and in Sunday school, but even then I'd I don't think I became like fully entrenched and edited in a kind anti-creedal views. I just didn't really think much about it again.

I can go so that it happened before 1820, so it's not really important. They did outsell at sky with thought about yeah but it had their thinking back on. The more I do remember in seminary, you know, we did talk much of this mess view of the creeds and stuff is kind of treat as bogeyman on a few ever counted that rents like creature so bad you know like there just sway people down and you know Joe Smith came in the rest of the restoration people were free from the shackles you knock those kindly treated as bogeyman but then we never actually read any you know it was only the bogeyman but I never really dug into why yet we know and an edge on the group but do so they can cover much detail as to why it just was like an overall sentiment that we were supposed to hold right so Dr. Al Latter Day Saints don't really have creeds and content of what the overall view of creeds are within the Latter Day Saints movement out of power of creeds been used historically in the Christian faith usually from what I understand it's basically interesting because the three main medical creeds apart from the Nicene Creed but so the two apostles Creed and Athanasian Creed.

We don't really know exactly who wrote them and we don't know exactly when they came into existence, but they just somehow like ubiquitously started being passed around all the churches confessed stenosis. Like the third fourth century. Her third fourth for centuries back that nighttime range, so they been kind of used is like a common confession of faith liquor describing introducing what creeds are. It's like when someone ask you what can you believe what you believe vibrated up clubs or an idea, but with these throughout the centuries urban people try to challenge the faith or come in and teach different doctrines Antonino unorthodox or heretical doctrines, and so to have creeds is kind of been like a goalpost or C-note. Not a bad way, no adjustment. The quickly gave comics like a bad thing but it's more like fences to keep you from falling off the cliff, think so either stairs if you don't deny the resurrection of the dead know that's in all the creeds. That's that's a pretty big thing and there are groups of professed to be Christian, who deny that there will be a physical resurrection. So there's just a lot of things there took to protect the saints from outside influences. You know wolves that would try to come in and teach false doctrines and to also.

I think it's also a teaching tool.

When you're when you're knitting you got a catechumen which assembly is just new to the faith that he's learning about what you believe, well, what's the most basic thing you can turn to to say IS what we believe fully to turn to the medical creeds that the three creeds work. We talked about.

So it's been gotten multiple uses, but maybe you can fill in some of the details I forgot that I think you're right and get all the main points. No, this is fenceposts keeping us now and the next.

Ironically, that's what Joseph Smith mentioned in the quote that I read from them. As thing that bothered him about it because he said they tell you can go this far and no further. But why is that a bad thing. You know, to him it was because CT was ranging all over the place with this theology, and so he didn't want to be fenced and by running any kind of thought were created to become prior to him by the apostles. Specifically, it's the oldest Creed of the Christian faith. And as you noted, we don't really know who wrote it.

There is a tradition that is not not correct, but if it was a tradition mechanic cropped up in the sixth century that the apostles, the 12 apostles of Jesus actually wrote the apostles Creed. Each of them contributing one of the 12 statements but that tradition is is the reason why it's called the apostles Creed with a tradition about it is not correct, but it is it is attested earlier and in Christian history. And it kinda comes from its developed cut out of the old Roman Creed that was used on baptisms and that can be dated to the middle of the second century, right around the hundred and 40 A.D. in Greek and in Latin later in 390 A.D. is when it can be a test as well, but the apostles Creed, develops out of that but just want to get that out there. I think it's it's good that you have this have this tradition that developed in the six century about it, but it's also good that we can say that tradition is incorrect. And so it doesn't doesn't place upon us a requirement for us to accept it is not as out as being on the same level as Scripture, but it definitely is in an attestation to the earliest beliefs of the Christian faith area also reports and also point out that we don't believe that it's in addition to Scripture or that it the creeds themselves are Scripture we just believe that they accurately describe the Scripture teaches sought inasmuch as accurately describe Scripture that we can consider them true and that's why they're used a lot churches Leica and a lot of quoted as part of the liturgy of an elective Anglican or Lutheran service survey Presbyterian. Sometimes though the read the Nicene Creed of Arabia. The apostles Creed or your church do you do recite creeds part of your worship service and and if so in what way know we don't mean we certainly have nothing against it is just not part of our worship service retentive artist.

Ours is less liturgical. I guess you could say no liturgical in a sense of like a lot of times there's kind like a set standard way of of how the disturbance goes and usually is like the pet the priest or the minister will say something and then the crowd responds economically see a lot of that in in height height. I churches can like an angry and response game. So, resulting in size is not something we really do that but I did see that in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. That is my area in the Kennedy that night. I like that but I am no so because my church comes out of that American restoration remits that I what I wouldn't say that my experience in church on a weekly basis is anti-creedal at all.

In fact, it I've never heard an anti-creedal sentiment, brought up in it and it church service on Sunday school or anything like that it's it's part of our history but with largely moved beyond it when I was attending Cincinnati Christian University for seminary as part of the church history course that I took to mention this before the professor had us read together do a call and response, for the Nicene Creed as we were studying that that section of church history, and member him making the statement, deceased. You know he was lifelong American restoration movement person and he kinda made the statement you know that our our movement has had an anti-creedal past, but he doesn't find anything wrong with with reading me the Nicene Creed so that is interesting, but you know we don't we don't recite creeds as part of our worship services.

We made you call response with some Scripture passages an elder will stand up and and will call response with Scripture passages. But beyond that, nothing the creeds so do you think there's anything inherently wrong with creeds. Matthew is as fresh as Protestants to say that the Bible is our sole rule of faith to think there's anything wrong with creeds know I can jump the gun a little bit down when I said earlier the hard disk at that as long as a is adequate adequately summarize and conform to Scripture than they can be in of the sugar can be used and yet there were something that were completely just wrong that I thought that I found in one the creeds I would say well I would've I would fall this Creed but with the caveat that I'm not sure about this particular line so you know ultimately extensively hold the sole Scripture aura between Scripture alone, although that doesn't mean that Scripture is our only authority just means that the sole infallible authority everyone faith practice for the church and so we had to have tradition that we need to be careful about what you said sometimes tradition is just flat-out wrong. No people are fallible, so we have to continually look at Scripture as our standard so yeah as long as it's as long as it's agreed to Scripture than this totally fine and I think that's a good thing.

The and I agree, and I'm not because my background and in Mormonism and someone kinda stepped into the river of Christianity at 1820 and it I read Packer's Jack Packer's quote earlier and I agree with them. You know we we impoverish ourselves. If we ignore the tradition of the Christian faith. There been many many faithful saints prior to us who have given their lives as martyrs who have held strong in the face of persecution to the faith once for all delivered to the same so I think it's okay to to read the creeds and understands the development of Christian doctrine and how each of the ecumenical creeds was a reaction to teachings that were influential within the church that were heretical and and were addressing teachings that were contrary to the role of faith so that really forced to force people to have to help to decide, okay are you with this group or attacker because she'll get into it with the Nicene Creed by the Council of Nicaea. That was the Arian controversy.

You could point to Scripture's idea form that two areas this fall. This a yeah we believe that you know but then they would save with this understanding are with this idea. So they had to come up with different mean of this Creed to say okay like look your inner either greatness or you don't know like it's pretty clear you know a line in the sand and so they admit that they didn't agree with what they're saying. So it makes it makes it makes it clear where perhaps you could take a particular pastor Scripture out of context and say well I understand it my way. You understand your way to some just makes it clear damn stent eyes.

So we mentioned earlier, the Mormons will often claim that they don't have creeds, but do they, given the definition of creed that we kind of been discussing tonight to do they have creeds yeah can also jump the gun a little bit you like you had to come to think that the articles of faith is the most obvious example of a Creed.

Although maybe it's not as what it is technically Scripture as I get to seem different. It's it's has more authority than we believe that creeds should have because they believe that was revealed from God that thing so biscuit for Scripture, they have to believe it. Right is not kind of daddy of Scripture as God's word so they've elevated the 13 articles of faith to Scripture as we when you hold the creeds to level Scripture was discovered fascinating was even super is like super it's a super Creed in a when it's on the level Scripture.

Yeah for sure and and there's actually someone mentioned this on Facebook a while a few days ago and I member sitting at him thinking that I should know a little bit more about that but they made the claim that Joseph Smith actually changed the content of the articles of faith. The obvious articles of faith that I've seen that charge kinda thrown around before but had never really dug into it because this far as I knew the articles of faith came from the Lamberth letter which he wrote in 1842 QA Chicago newspaper editor to kinda give us a brief history of the LDS faith ends and also what they believe and so that the 13 statements that are, as you noted, canonized as the obvious articles of faith they come from that Lamberth letter but there were earlier versions, and I found an article on Church of Jesus Christ.org written by John W. Welch and David J Whitaker called. We believe the subtitle is development of the articles of faith suggested to change over time, but as you noted, the 1842 version written by Joseph Smith is the one that's canonized and also comes through in of the person that they are revered as a prophet and so that that does hold. I guess more authority than the previous versions. So the article kinda notes that there was a version written by Oliver Cowdrey in 1834 in the Latter Day Saints messenger and advocate periodical and so there's 13 statements there as well. But the quite different than what you find. In 1842 version similar sentiments there, but does my different ordering in some different wording as well and then Joseph Young also wrote a version to see if this is where is was published so he was proselyting in Boston in 1836 and was approached by John Hayward, a local editor and asked for written statement of the creeds doctrine, sentiments, or religious notions of the LDS church and so he presented 123455 statements that that he would've called articles of faith Orson Pratt in 1840 wrote some it was in the tract that was titled interesting account of several remarkable visions and of the late discovery of ancient American records and I think this is the version that gets closer to what Joseph Smith produces 1942 but then Orson Hyde and Germany in Frankfurt Germany in 1842 published to attract call the cry from the wilderness and the fourth chapter has some additional articles of faith, but the ones are accepted are those that do just that and in the Lamberth letter and I did I would say that you know there'd been treated almost in the same way that creeds are in, and Christianity. No primary children as their graduating from primary and going into young women's and young men's programs as teenagers. There often asked to memorize and recite one of the articles of faith before the congregation sometimes in Sunday school. If you're studying a particular doctrine of the lesson manual will instruct you to do or citation of one of the articles of faith and so there's definitely some some ways in which they're treated similarly and and just based on what you were saying earlier about the meaning of the word created in minutes. No coming from the roof and in Latin credo, which means I believe you know that the way that the articles of faith. Eric Rh began with the statement. We believe except for one of my think think of 12 of them began with the statement, we believe there definitely kinda set up as a as a creed of sorts for the LDS church and when I was serving as a missionary.

L.

Tom Perry, who at the time was that he's possibly now, but he was one of the 12 apostles of the LDS church gave a talking and one of the general conference as well as on the mission about the articles of faith and encouraged all Latter Day Saints to study the teachings of Mormonism. In light of the articles of faith. And if that's not the way that creeds are used in broader Christianity. I don't I don't know what it is that you study what the Christian church believes, and in light of the creeds and what they state so although Latter Day Saints have this anti-creedal sentiment, they do have some statements that the function at least as a creed for them.

Our like to walk with Jesus when he is really national born and raised in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in order to more commonly referred to as the all of us have left that religion drawn to faith in Jesus Christ as our podcast brightness. Next, John 19 the true light which gives light to everyone you found life beyond Mormonism brighter than we were told in the light, we have is not our own comes to us from without purpose is to share our journeys of faith God has done in joining us to his son. Stations about all aspects of the transition joys and everything in between that you found this and hope you stick around race that brings us to the content Matthew of the apostles Creed. We just read through each of the 12 statements of the apostles Creed and talk about each one individually, briefly, that you have it up in front of you will see yes I do. So, if you will read the first women share anything you want to share on that. I think maybe make a statement as we go on H1 whether or not we think Latter Day Saints could agree with this.

The statement of the apostles. As I get saw the greasers by saying I believe in God the father Almighty Creator of heaven and earth, so terms of comments on that. I think that's pretty explicit.

Although this might ask us what does that mean that the father is the only God, you know that only the father's God will aggressively that Christ is God. I think it's just kind of following the standard of the Pauline how Paul doesn't in his letters.

He kind of refers to God the father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Something is kind of just following the following that kind of structure. There were the first was at first clause I guess my first phrase, yet it is pretty clear that the Godfather created heaven and earth.

Although not complete separate from this, the son and the Holy Spirit. You know it was a Trinitarian act of creation. But I think we we attribute that specifically to God the father, not because he was the sole one doing it or because he did it of his own will, but because I forget what the phrases Matthew Barrett's simply Trinity. He he he's basically talks about how a lot of times in Scripture, we ascribe certain acts to a specific person in the Trinity you know that doesn't mean that it's completely separate from the other two or that you know they did it by themselves. So I think that's kind what's going on here. Scott is in on the father is.

You know the one who we pray to the one who sent the son into the world. He's the one orchestrating and directing everything says, she's described or attributed the as Creator of heaven and earth. Even though that doesn't mean that the spirit and some are completely not involved they were involved, but while rambling there but hope that makes us it does make sense. So I think some of the statements may be where Latter Day Saints might have a difficult time signing onto our God the father Almighty because as you as you noted, they might ask is is God the only is the father. The only God in any kind of took that to to the sense that yes we would also as Christians affirm that Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is God, but Latter Day Saints have particular anthropology a particular view of humanity that according to Joseph Smith the mind of man is uncreated and so there's a there's an aspect of humanity that like God the father is affirming Christianity be uncreated on Mormonism Latter Day Saints affirm that there's an aspect of humanity that is uncreated as well and so they might quibble about that and then know that goes to the whole idea of Creator of heaven and earth. They would also probably quibble there over whether creation was asked my ex Nilo or X materia from from nothing more from pre-existing materials and Christians would affirm that creation was ex Nilo and and so that would kind of exclude any idea that that humanity was created from pre-existing intelligences that are co-eternal with God, says Joseph Smith would have would've put it to good points right so the next statement. Apostles Creed is the first in black began, I believe, and so the second statement begins with and and in Jesus Christ his only begotten son, our Lord.

I think there's not much here that on the surface.

Latter Day Saints would disagree with Christians affirm that Jesus Christ is God's only begotten son, our Lord, on the surface, I say, but there's a word in here begotten that Latter Day Saints and Christians have very different views about the meaning of that word just a little bit about that Matthew making it shows reading or thinking about this earlier because there was a lot of controversy nearly church, but what it meant that Jesus was the monogamous they asked you know which which is the Greek fare which is traditionally been transited only begotten son what you know only got God's monotonous Dallas Andaman organist. We asked his only begotten son so what is that mean there's a lot of countries are behind that but like the traditional Nicene understanding, which is as to what Trinitarian Christianity accepts today. The idea that's so Christ is one with the father. In essence, so there, was Yost meeting.

Whatever. What makes the father, God is shared with the sun, so the sun is just as much God as the father is in the father kind of be God eternally in eternity past, so it's not is not a moment in time.

It's kind of like an eternal beginning which we don't really know what that means but it's in eternally beginning of the sons of the father in eternity past in Easley's eyes would be getting the son, but it's in the it's an eternal beginning, so there's no reference to time is also an internal beginning systolic God the father created a second God you know if the son is the same essence as the father. So it's one God. So that's the traditional understanding of what it means for Christ to be the son of God because it is been a lot of other different views of what it means we son of God, you know, some I think Arius issues. It was a controversy at the Council of Nicaea. He said that he's the son of God in a sense, he's the first created being of the father and the only crater being of the father and everything else was created by the sun.

So those those are definitions that we would reject but yes traditional understanding and that differs from LDS because they believe that Christ is in two senses the literal son of the father, one spiritually where heavenly father and have the mother in some sense, or in some way organize Jesus the spirit body and no back before the world was created and a second since he's the literal father of Christ in some sense also and you'll get a lot of debate there, their worst statement setting from the Pratt's primarily maybe Miriam Young talked about how God the father came down and literally begat Christ by consorting with Mary the virgin Mary, but I think traditionally, Mormons are Latter Day Saints daily that the mystery but in some sense, God the father is the literal father of Jesus's physical body as well, which is something that Christians historical Christian has not really leave, which I think will get into in the very good points.

So II like where you went with the talking about the eternal beginning of the Sonnen and Matthew Beckett since the salon simply Trinity's visionary listeners that they would be interested in in that book I would highly recommend it's gets into some deep theology, but it's written and engaging way. I was surprised.

I expected to be in a just full on deep theology, but the PT writes about his own fandom of Los Angeles teams and sports teams so it's it's it's it's a very engaging book, but so do Latter Day Saints have a belief in the eternal beginning of the son. Do you think I don't think so.

I think it depends on how you they would define internal because a lot of times when you point to passages that say that, from everlasting to everlasting you are God will point to the Hebrew word word for everlasting and it means well. It's like on the horizon also really long ways away but we don't know what's beyond the horizon so they might define eternal or everlasting is just a really really long time, but still a finite amount of time so they so how is different than the now Christians would define the term eternal eternal meaning just outside time without respect to time so they would they might flatter word worlds fragments. The language of the Nicene could before all worlds break exactly yeah so they might say well yeah sure.

I believe that Christ is eternally begotten of the father, but eternally meaning a long time ago, or even eternal is Kevin redefining the document comes to mean related to God, you know, eternal suffering is not suffering without end after, says that eternal suffering is God suffering eternal life is God's life.

So the kind of redefine it there so that's why say depends on how they would use the term eternal so we talked about in a previous episode where we would. We reacted to a an article by what the professor we had Jackson Washburn on to talk about that article. It we talked about in that episode. How at least that BYU professor was expressing the idea that he thought Latter Day Saints could could adopt the belief that Jesus is both fully divine and fully human.

And so if our listeners want to go back and check out that up so we talk about that that kind of at length there, but is, zero in on that word. Begotten, because you can tease out some differences there but as I noted with relation to the first statement of the apostles Creed, Latter Day Saints, have this anthropology's view of humanity where we are co-eternal with God and so if that's the case in an as is Latter Day Saints will often claim that humans and Jesus and God the father.

All of the same species as the language they will use. If that's the case if if Latter Day Saints or correct about that then you doing away completely with any idea of Jesus being or is Christ being the only begotten son, there's there's no sense in which you can affirm that humanity is the same species as God and also affirm that Jesus is the only begotten son incessant. That's a huge difference.

And so a good thing about that understanding when I was first leaving the LDS church let me that to ask the question several times and in LDS discussion forms know is that true then that if your document is true any of us could technically have filled the role of Savior. There's nothing unique about Jesus Christ that made him uniquely able to carry out that role that we couldn't have done given our natures.

According to Latter Day Saints teaching. Would you agree with my assessment of that method to an extent because I know that they would probably say that Christ was the only possible candidate to be Savior because he was the firstborn meeting the literal firstborn spirit offspring of heavenly father and his wife, one of his wives, possibly so like this disc firstborn status given certain prerogatives. I guess I think that's kind of how Bruce McConkie has explained it, but I do agree that he's done in terms of his is being his essence. He's not of that of a completely different kind that would make it completely separate from us.

It's it's in an obvious thought. Anyway he is he is of the same kind is us, just like further progressed and so I guess it would be possible potentially mean I do not have tasking on the Estes. But what if you know that I guess only real difference is they believe that God the God the father is the literal physical father of Jesus is mortal body so if by some miraculous means instead of Jesus or somebody else that were conceived in a by the working Holy Spirit in a virgin that they could have been you know the Savior. Enter now but so you like his other men might give you some pushback on that because Jesus was the firstborn and we are not.

I think you're right to Canada lean into that idea that I think is Orson Pratt, put forth write that and that the where where Jesus Christ becomes unique on the LDS view as is and that idea of the literal, physical be jetting and that's that's wound into a more with next statement, but also want to point out that the term only begotten shows up a lot in the book of Mormon, and in the doctrine and covenants, so I think Latter Day Saints need to wrestle a little bit with what they mean by only begotten end and whether that's a loan word from Christianity alone term from Christianity that the that they can fully adopt. Given their anthropology given to what they believe about the nature of humanity, and we have other programs to where we talked about Christ could give you specific ones but I'm sure if you go to our our article of faith seriously talk about the first article of faith in the Trinity about liking for example, John eight, Jesus says you are from a blow I am from above a lot of passages indicate that he is uniquely from God you know in a way that none of humanity is so not just physically noisy unique, but he is of he's divine in the sense he came from heaven where we didn't something that's important to point out because elders play rocket from above, so how do you affirm those passages are just as I'm from above. You are from below so very good apps that I was referencing with Jackson.

Washburn was episode 93. The divinity and humanity of Jesus Christ and I put divinity first in the title because I think is a challenge. Latter Day Saints just now to really think through their anthropology.

The divinity of Jesus Christ and what that means is critical to the atonement and I think with Latter Day Saints theology. There are some areas where it becomes less critical and so you you end up left you love your left wondering why the book of Mormon would say that God himself must come down on the tone for the sins of the people. If if according to LDS views of eternal progression.

Jesus Christ hadn't himself progressed through all of the steps necessary for Latter Day Saints to become gods and goddesses.

Matthew over the next statement. Sure, step number three right so continuing on.

Speaking of Jesus says who was conceived from the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary, so week with Bartlett in the previous statement is from, dip into each other. You know they bleed run to reach others.

I think maybe there we will have a lot to say about this but I'm I think LDS and traditional Christianity would agree about the Virgin Mary, although a lot of traditional Christianity would believe that Mary is was perpetually sinless that are perpetually a virgin. I cannot even after Christ's birth. She did have the children that's that's kind the more Roman Catholic and some some more traditional branches like Anglicanism and maybe Luther maybe Anglicans in Lutherans would believe the perpetual virginity of Mary.

At the time of Jesus's birthday. We agree that she was a virgin but the line it's really controversial on set about how he was conceived from the Holy Spirit so they would probably have to give an*there to say that they agree with that.

To say well it's Jesus was conceived by the working of the Holy Spirit in some fashion. You know, because as we said, believe that Jesus is the literal physical offspring of the father and how that works. Some go so far to say that you know that they try to get to the mechanics of it like will the Holy Spirit transmitted you know half of the father's chromosomes into her belly. You know to to create the you know about this. I go in all of mechanics of the biology of it and some just a wallets up the mystery. Somehow the spirit was involved in how the fathers involved and so really depends which LDS you will talk about but they don't really have a hard solid doctrinal statement on what that means signal that Jesus was conceived by the working voice. They just know the spirit was involved but yet it at the same time he's not the offspring of the spirit because of the spirit would be the father of Jesus physical body they still believe that the father is the literal father of his physical body, but in no and all of that is it's really only a problem for the Latter Day Saints right because because of their view of the Godhead as three separate physical beings rather than one God exactly stuff you if it was the same God that would be a problem but we don't like it like we talk about earlier.

We don't believe that Jesus is the son of God. Just because because he is the physical offspring of God. We believe that he's eternally God's son Nino even built long before the world was created before time existed. He was still stunned.

Some, this idea that he's he has to be Nice physical offspring of only the father is yelling. He said only problem for LDS when I get any thoughts on this.

You have to just just to make the statement that were not trying to be offensive to Latter Day Saints. We know that Latter Day Saints do not necessarily accept views of Orson Pratt or other early latter-day St. leaders in the polygamy. To know made some statements with regards to the conception of Jesus Christ that that modern Latter Day Saints would not hold to were not trying to hold you accountable to those in say that's what you believe were just kinda pointing out that there is a sense in which those statements made by those leaders are there not just kinda crazy off the wall statements. They are attempting to be consistent with the rest of Latter Day Saints theology, which is why they land where they do with those statements even if they are offensive to modern Latter Day Saints. Years and has a great, great, that is clear that are asked of the fourth statement suffered under pot, under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried.

She descended into hell. So the first three clauses there 700 Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried. Those all are affirmations of the story of Christ's life and ministry, and death and burial in the Gospels, the statement she descended into hell comes from assists the computer some better annexes. I have been the reference on that, but it's Latter Day Saints like this statement because it is the past is best based on because it for them. It it's a proof text for their belief and kind of a two-tiered life after death prior to the final judgment where the spirits of the righteous will go to paradise the spirits of the wicked will go to spirit prison. And so for them this idea. That's behind this is that he went to spirit prison to preach the gospel and to initiate the preaching of the gospel to those who are in spirit prison to give them a and a second chance after death to accept the gospel and be saved, which is a doctrine very somewhat similar to the Catholic Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory that certain souls will do penance and then receive punishment in purgatory until their souls are purged of and refined in the manner they are able to go on to salvation. So what are your thoughts there on on this statement here. He descended into hell. The bearing of how all of the matters that's a topic of ice found fascinating. There's different views must reformed what this what this phrase means that Jesus descended.

Hell, there's a difference in amongst Lutherans and Orthodox and Catholic still have different views.

What this means and I think I don't of the second Peter one off top my head, but there is a passage in Ephesians 4, so reading it, it says this is why it says when he ascended on high, he led captives away and gave gifts to men.

What does he ascended mean except that he also descended to the lower parts of the earth, and that's kind of also was also kind of in reference to Psalm 1610, which is quoted in asked to 27. You will not abandon my soul to Hades and in Psalms.

It's fishy all which is kind like the Jewish idea of the underworld or death will not bend my soul to Hades which the underworld review of the place. The dead nor will you let your holy one see decay gathers this idea of Jesus dying and being late in the earth.

And so, in the Latin, it was it. It talks about defending the Latin word of the apostles Creed I should say it's descended added and Pharaoh switches. He descended into hell.

So that's kind of a controversial because we buy different ideas when it means the reformed view is kind of like while he descended into hell and across the sense of. He descended into ultimate suffering for our sins to Canada.

More yeah, like you said the traditional views literally descended into the place of the dead, for various reasons. So I think that's that's the one that I think is the most controversial. I think you and amongst confessing Christians. Trinitarian Christians right that that would tell you a debate about what that means exactly, but I don't think it's anti-scriptural assistant. Maybe we interpret what that means exactly differently. I was without the SAC that he descended into to Hades, which is the spirit world and thus the spirit paradise right because they believe that Jesus could go personally to spirit prison yet to send envoys messengers are the are not part of the pastor. Now, but it's it's definitely that idea right that the Christ preached on Isaacson, one of the epistles of Peter talks about the those who had died in on in the times of Noah first Peter three for first if it so the second pre-19 is evidence yet because I think to enter 20 him him so that's support to read through these, but also as you notice it is important to note also that just like with the Scriptures right we can as we read something we can import our own ideas of what it might mean into it prices as latter-day Sam. I read the apostles Creed and read this. He descended into hell. Their mind is going to go to first Peter 319, right but it's not. That's not necessarily what this is referring to. So want to read again from the know your Creed know the creeds and councils book by Justin S. Holcomb where he talks about this. This part of the creed. He says for those who grew up in a Roman Catholic context expression. He descended into hell maybe familiar because it is associated with the doctrine of the harrowing of Hell in Catholic theology. The idea is that after Christ's death on the cross, his spirits tended to feel the world word in Hebrew for the underworld where the dead reside in order to preach the gospel to the patriarchs. The Old Testament saints, and potentially to other virtuous pagans who lived before the revelation of Jesus Christ. I'm so that's again this thought is based on first Peter three. Much of this discussion is not based on the Bible the New Testament itself emphasizes the consequences of Christ's death and resurrection from the dead, in which he triumphs over sin and death and the devil rather than what Christ did between death and resurrection. Initially the language of descent into hell was borrowed from the Old Testament.

As you noted this simply meant that Jesus died were passed to fuel the pit of her grave. Just as any other person did.

I'm so it's another kind of statement about that that Jesus was like us in every way right that in the incarnation, whatever was not assumed by Jesus was not redeemed by Jesus right up and Athanasius right so there are no maybe I was Irenaeus on the incarnation. Whatever was not assumed by Christ was not redeemed by Christ with regards to humanity and so death itself as well so dying was the final stage going on flip just Holcomb right Stein was the final stage of Christ, humiliation, necessary passage before his triumph in the resurrection second century theologian Tertullian wrote that quote Christ our God, who, because he was man died.

According to the same Scriptures satisfied. This law also by undergoing the form of human death in the underworld and did not ascend aloft to heaven until he had gone down to the Regents beneath the earth and so I guess just that's affirming that Jesus died he truly died she in the way that we all will die is what that's affirming is not really making a statement about what the first Peter three says comments thanks are showing up. Number five scroll down okay so we just read hi descended that hell is against the dumpster days are continuing on ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of God the father Almighty Siggy continues, I will come again to judge the living and the debt next to. So in terms of that we we agree on the ascension they know in acts chapter 1 Jesus ascended into heaven in a cloud and he is seated at the right hand of God the father Almighty, so we would probably read and I just read that and say yeah I agree God the father is a man glorified body.

Now Jesus has a is a man with a glorified body, and they're both sitting on thrones. Right next to each other but when we look at passages of Scripture to talk about Jesus being on the right hand of God. It's either meant in a metaphorical sense meaning like right hand of power, meaning like Easter when who's next to father and glory in a like he's he's the one who's given all power in heaven and earth. As Jesus said in Matthew 28 or when Stephen looked up in heaven he saw the glory of God and Jesus at the right hand of God and in their you never hear anything about a body from the father so well just use that as a proof text very often to show a the father is obliged like Jesus but if you scroll back. It says he saw the glory of God. But what is glorious light luminance radiance that kind of thing so he saw like the light that represented the father and Jesus. Next to that light. So that's what I think the big disc in order to have us because we just don't believe that God the father has a physical body because that opens a can of worms. How where did he get this body he would have to have gotten it from a different world who was how to create a different world before this world will then he must've had a God above him. They created that world and then got the father got his body from that world, obeying the commands of Jesus did and so on and so forth. So there's just no need for the father to have a body and there's no reason why he does have a body there's nothing in Scripture that affirms antibody longer points on noting the places where Latter Day Saints may have some disagreements with statements in the creed. So the eighth statement as I believe in the Holy Ghost.

I think the only aspect of that that Latter Day Saints might disagree with is just the nature of the Holy Ghost.

The Holy Spirit where Latter Day Saints stated that the Holy Spirit is a and as yet un-embodied intelligence separate and being from the father and the son who will at some point in the future, at least according to speculation receive his own body and and have a chance to become fully God, according to latter-day St. teaching so that's that's one difference against the point back to the second statement of its again where I don't think it's possible for Latter Day Saints to stay with regards to the father the son and the Holy Spirit that they are each fully God, Jesus Christ, according their theology now. Yes, prior to his incarnation, know that I don't think they could affirm that I wear as Christians would affirm that Jesus was fully God before the incarnation and after the incarnation and the Holy Spirit is fully God as well. So consequences. It's interesting to look at the apostles Creed and also the Nicene Creed because it's really not a lot there about the Holy Spirit. It's all scum like an addendum to the rest of it and especially the Nicene Creed because in ICN that the issue wasn't the Holy Spirit they were debating about that they're debating about who Christ is and how it relates to the father. So there's really not a lot of development in terms of who the Holy Spirit is in the early early church. That's kinda more the kind of had by no later cable who is the Holy Spirit is a person is a force you know having an early start stated they referred always referred to as a person, not as inanimate force that. Yet they when they develop the idea that on the one they define it in the Jesus that the sun is almost yes with the father. It's only natural that the Holy Spirit is referred to as God is also home it was Eos with the father because otherwise he could not be truly God you have to be a lesser being or are something else. So we we we we also affirm that justice Christ is not a separate daughter, separate being from the father. The spirit is not a separate being a separate God for the father, as you pointed out we were not expecting the Holy Spirit to have a body some day or two progressed her to do anything like that. He'll he's always been God. He always will be God and that's another thing I point out is it you'll see a lot of Christian hymns like I we we fall the Trinity hymnal in our church just, more reformed hymnal and there are songs in there praising and worshiping the Holy Spirit what you would never ever ever see in an LDS church and they do not pray to the Holy Spirit. They did not give praise and glory to the Holy Spirit Holy Spirit is seen as is seen.

Kind of like who is it like Hermes, seen on the Greek mythology, just the messenger, the tenant goes to and from God to us does things for God and he is a God, but were not supposed to talk to him directly or in worship him directly. I said that's a no-no. But we as Christians who believe the Holy Spirit is truly God. We can worship him very good point. Remember the first time singing in church the doxology and it was like wow this is so different would never have done this letter sent church so it next. When I believe in the holy Catholic church, the communion of the saints. So I think this would be a major point of divergence as well for Latter Day Saints. I don't think Latter Day Saints could say they believe in the holy Catholic Church. There are some now who want to be, soft pedaling their views to Christians of other faiths and say well you your Christians were Christians and we've got more stuff than you, but that more stuff to use is the belief in the great apostasy so there there according to St. teaching. There is no other church that has increased authority to perform ordinances and so as Brad Wilcox pointed out in a recent fireside where he was kind of taken to task on this issue, but more so on. Another but he made the statement that other churches are just playing church that's that really is Latter Day Saints view if you did you take the doctrine seriously that that no other church is authorized by God and Jesus Christ to bring people to salvation, and so there is no salvation in any other church but the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints according to their their doctrine so I don't think they could say they believe in the holy Catholic Church and by the this is referencing the Roman Catholic Church.

This is small. See Catholic Church which means universal, which is the idea that the church exists wherever the gospel has been preached and Christ has been received and send people have been drawn to the son by the father amen yeah and this idea that like he said the great apostasy of the fundamental belief of the holy Catholic Church as it has always been here. When Christ set up his church wasn't taken from the earth. You know it's got messy.

As we talked about you know we had divisions, we've had no there's been the Crusades been all kinds of bad stuff in the past few centuries, there's always been a promise at the gates of Hades would not prevail against Christchurch.

It's always been here, and that doesn't mean everything the church did was good. I think that's a problem that some people taking on this. It will God give us a church so you know whatever holy mother Church does is good and righteous and acceptable to God, but out of the best. Mr. Locascio coming half of the New Testament is written about things that the church did. That was not good, but what is not acceptable and I and I praise God for that because I gives us an example like you have the church is going to always be messy. Current Corinth was just a big mess and it never got better really to continue to have problems even after you know the apostolic era, and so on. Yeah but but there is this idea that does the church world has never renting from the earth, and that it never will be taken from the earth. And so we can take comfort in that segment price. I think we can cover the final three, 10, 11, 12 is one if you want to read those and then share your thoughts almost sure suctioning on. I believe in the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting. Amen.

So forgiveness of sins. Yes, I don't think we really have much disagreement there, although what qualifies as a sin we may have an issue there. Because of this believe that you have to have a full understanding or knowledge of something for it to be a sin, which is why Adam and was a transgression they didn't have knowledge of what they're doing so was listing to them so, but in terms of us and our stands since we do have knowledge, you know, we do receive the forgiveness of sins we do draft of a similar view of sins on transect so we believe that without the forgiveness of sins. There is no salvation son. Sometimes you have to be forgiven of your sins to return of God because no unclean thing can enter God's presence, and we agree on that on terms of the resurrection of the body adding is pretty clear to just as Jesus rose from the grave and he appeared to be apostles with a body that that was resurrected and glorified. We agree on that. And so we believe that all those who are in Christ will be resurrected as well as those who are not in Christ. They will also be resurrected and the life everlasting.

That's not just saying that will live forever and ever and ever about living in God's presence. Those who are in Christ and are saved. But the big differences is that we don't believe that there are different kingdoms of glory necessarily. There's debate as to whether there are different rewards in heaven based on how faithful you are in life amongst Christians, which is what I personally see when I see Scripture amino acid is a talk about how you know God in Revelation talk to how he opens the books and the rewards to everyone, good or bad, you know, so I believe that there is good to be a lot of saints ahead of me. You know that they have sale. I don't know your mansions and we are ever in heaven and I'm fine with that and go with that. But that doesn't mean that they're in a completely different kingdom, or that they're completely separate from the from God's presence. LDS theology if you read D&C 76 it says that only those are in the celestial kingdom can access the father can be in the presence of the father, and even then you have to reach the highest level of there's three levels in the social kingdom you have to reach exaltation highest level to be in the fullness of the presence of the father, Devon existence, a key as we don't believe that were knocking to be like different levels of gods and angels and stuff in heaven were all going to be just Christ's bride in heaven praise and glorify God in you and in our resurrected bodies.

So that's kind of the difference on say is no. There's not like different tears of heaven based on what ordinances you received are what covenants you are faithful to know where either in heaven. What level of righteousness you're able to attain to write exactly the huge difference when you talk about that and it goes to that the line about forgiveness of sins. Although there you would you believe that we would agree with Latter Day Saints, the forgiveness of sins is necessary to obtain eternal life. There is some difference as you noted in terms of what stem is and when and how we receive forgiveness and which sins we receive forgiveness for for example a baptism Latter Day Saints would say that baptism cleanses you from past sins does not absolve you of future sin. So you have to continually repent and maintain your worthiness within the Latter Day Saints faith in them and ideas of salvation so we talked about in many previous episodes Latter Day Saints and the feeling of a heavy weight that the they're not good enough for those higher levels of the celestial kingdom. As you noted, Matthew, so that's a big difference because the Christian faith, the Christian gospel is good news because it's about the faithfulness of God, not about the faithfulness of man, it's about the faithfulness of God to keep his promises. So the Christian has hope even in their struggles against sin throughout the rest of their Christian walk.

They have the hope and the promise of Christ that he will fulfill his promises and bring them into the presence of the father and man and enter him something. I was reading about recently. That's interesting that I was reading differences between reformed Lutherans that are there different traditions, but they both agree that the law in and of itself cannot do anything to help us. The law only really shows us arson and it's kind of, but same time it's not terribly old. Paul says that the law is a good thing. In Romans, but he but it's on by the law that we progress to some higher level of existence or something like that were saved by the gospel, the good news that Christ died for us on our behalf, and the law serves as kind of like a standard of moral principles to follow.

But that's not how are saved anymore.

You know is like where it we get in to the church by you know by the gospel and then we stay and achieve higher levels of existence by good works, you know it's it's all the gospel, whereas in the LDS church in amounts to try to say that they believe that it works righteousness purely works righteousness, but they do believe that every blessing from God's is predicated upon obedience to a law is of the whole system is OBS tool on some said so even the gospel to them is a law and in that sense it's like a lot. You have to keep is accepting the LDS church that taught the laws and ordinances of the gospel which seems kind of contradictory to most probably historical Christian zeal. They see law, kind of in opposition to the gospel or law fulfilled in the gospel rather than being the gospel being aligned and of itself. Very good of you to listen all to the white horse and podcast effortlessness of their stuff and it's been pretty good. I think it's behind a pay wall mounts as I can't forget Otis on their website anyway. Maybe if you watch your spot fire wasn't just bonfire something to be absent and I just picked up starting listen to it over the last few days I've been working on a bathroom remodel and that they're doing a series of episodes through the book of Hebrews that I think is really good and I will send the one yesterday as I was doing some painting called Jesus our hope are no psychiatrists takes a came out today is called Jesus our hope and that's if they did they cover those challenging passages in Hebrews that much Latter Day Saints like to to throw out there is as a proof text that see Christians can lose their salvation Hebrews 6 of interest and fix the cover those passages in and talk about how Jesus is our hope that I would recommend that upsetting to her listeners. It's against the white horse in podcasts Jesus our hope episode published February 20, 2022 related podcast episode because kind of in depth on some of the topics that Matthew and I were just going into with the side with the idea forgiveness extends an in law and gospel and and life everlasting. And so recommend that episode that fireflies are kind of brings us to the end of our discussion on the apostles Creed. I just want to close out with another quote from know the councils, no degrees, counseled by Justin S Holcomb. She says churches still recite the apostles Creed during baptisms is a summary of the state into which Christians are baptized church historian Philip Schaff notes that quote is the Lord's prayer is the prayer prayers, the Decalogue, the 10 Commandments, the law of laws so the apostles Creed is the creed of creeds" and just Holcomb goes on to say, perhaps more than any other profession of faith. The apostles Creed is expressed. The essentials of Christianity in a way that Christians of all stripes can rally around and I would challenge Latter Day Saints listeners to ask themselves, can they with with Christians of all stripes rally around the state and submit apostles. Without any fudging is good extra example is a good upstart is good to catch up with the capture accepted. Thank you for tuning into this episode of the outer brightness podcast. We'd love to hear from you. Please visit the out of brightness podcast page on Facebook. Feel free to send us a message there with comments or questions clicking send a message at the top of the page.

We would appreciate it if you give the page alike. We also have an outer brightness group on Facebook can join and interact with us and others.

As we discussed the podcast asked episodes and suggestions for future etc. you can also send us an email outer brightness Gmail.com. Hope to hear from you soon.

You can subscribe to outer brightness wherever you listen to podcasts. If you are benefiting from our content please write a review to help us spread the word subscribe to our YouTube channel and hit that notification will use it for out of brightness is graciously provided by the talented Breanna Flournoy and Adams Road. You can learn more about Adams Road. By visiting their ministry. Page at Adams Road. Ministry.com is diseased in my Jesus is now 90 Jesus is a and and and and she and a is the and and a a a a a a is is is is is being is


Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime