Skip to main content

Joseph Smith had the same Demon that influenced Muhammad

What does Islam have in common with Mormonism? Seriously, the similarities are uncanny. Like human beings, demons are creatures of habit. The Bible does not tell us much about them, but from what it does tell us, we can learn a lot. Jesus reveals to us some things about their behavior:


When the unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it passes through waterless places seeking rest, but finds none. Then it says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when it comes, it finds the house empty, swept, and put in order. Then it goes and brings with it seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter and dwell there, and the last state of that person is worse than the first…[1]


Jesus clearly knows that demons have typical behaviors. He has seen it many times before. He lets us know that a typical behavior for a demon is that home is where the heart is. When your house crumbles to the ground, you move to a new one. Likewise, when a person dies, the demon is forced to move to a new house. Much like what we are discussing here: from Muhammad to Joseph Smith and likely several in between.

I find it interesting what Paul teaches Timothy about where the doctrines or teachings of demons come from: “Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared…”[2] This passage seems to give strength to my argument that Christians cannot be possessed, but they can definitely beinfluenced.

Consider another typical experience found in the New Testament Gospels concerning demons… Someone brings a person who is possessed by a demon to Jesus, and at times, there is a wild reaction at the sight of Jesus by the demon, signifying yet another typical behavior, but in the case that person is blind because of the demon, there seems to be no such reaction: “Then a demon-oppressed man who was blind and mute was brought to him, and he healed him, so that the man spoke and saw.”[3] So with this man who was “oppressed” by a demon (the Greek word used here is δαιμονιζόμενος, which means to be possessed by a demon), it seems to point to the idea that there was a demon working to keep this man blind and mute in an ongoing fashion. In other words, a demon lived in this man and made his house (out of him) the way he liked it, and maintained the furniture in his house, so to speak, much like any human being would do. Another point to this is to show that demons are very comfortable around human beings, likely because human beings are creatures of habit, and so the demon can learn the habits and accommodate. In other words, human beings are predictable. In any case, we find that from these passages, we can come to the conclusion that a demon prefers what is familiar and predictable, and will manipulate the person he possesses or influences in a specific direction.

One way to see that the same demon that possessed or influenced Muhammad ultimately landed in Joseph Smith is by examining the same tracks that were left in the snow. When an animal has a distinct physical characteristic such as a broken leg that was healed, or a toe that was trapped somehow and pulled off, or even a leg that was stuck in between two trees and the animal broke it off, a tracker can recognize the distinctions in the tracks and clearly see that he is following the same animal, even from several days or weeks before, for whatever reason (hunting, biological studies, photography, etc.). So let’s now look at the tracks in the snow, so to speak, and we will see that it is the case that the founder of Mormonism was indeed possessed (or influenced) by the same demon as the founder of Islam.



They both had multiple wives


Sura 4:3 in the Quran, we find, “And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the right course.”[4]

Here, not only does this passage in the Quran condone polygamy, but even gives a specific number that a man can marry.


The Latter Day Saints website states, “After receiving a revelation commanding him to practice plural marriage, Joseph Smith married multiple wives and introduced the practice to close associates.”[5] Again, we find that, conveniently, Joseph Smith received a revelation and therefore condoned polygamy.


It is common knowledge that both the founder of Islam and the founder of Mormonism were deeply rooted in polygamy. Many have argued at this point that the Bible is as well, but the difference is that the Bible never condones polygamy, whereas Islam does, and Mormonism did (and many Mormons today still condone it). Polygamy and polyandry both belittle the opposite sex. Polygamy shows how women are lower than men in importance, and similarly for polyandry, men are belittled by elevating the woman above men in a matter of importance. The Bible teaches that men and women are valued equally by God. In Galatians 3:28, we read, “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” In Christianity, the souls of women and men are held in the same respect. This cannot be said in Mormonism and Islam.



They both claimed to be a prophet


The Quran tells its readers that “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah…” It is pretty clear that Muhammad thought pretty highly of himself. See the larger context:


He it is who sent His Messenger with the guidance and the true religion that He may make it prevail over all the religions; and Allah is enough for a witness. Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those with him are firm of heart against the unbelievers, compassionate among themselves; you will see them bowing down, prostrating themselves, seeking grace from Allah and pleasure; their marks are in their faces because of the effect of prostration; that is their description in the Taurat (Torah) and their description in the Injeel (New Testament); like as seed-produce that puts forth its sprout, then strengthens it, so it becomes stout and stands firmly on its stem, delighting the sowers that He may enrage the unbelievers on account of them; Allah has promised those among them who believe and do good, forgiveness and a great reward.[6]


Similarly, Joseph Smith writes, “And again, so soon as I had the spirit of prophecy, when standing up, I prophesied concerning the rise of this Church, and many other things connected with the Church, and this generation of the children of men.”[7]

Again, both Joseph Smith and Muhammad claimed to be prophets of God, and though there are uncanny similarities between the two, there are basically no similarities between them and biblical prophets.


They both were visited by an angel


One of my former professors writes in his book, "The Guide to Answering Islam: What every Christian needs to know about Islam and the rise of radical Islam," the story of what Muslims believe to be the history of how Muhammad received his revelation.


When Muhammad said that he could not read, the angel embraced him and forced the air out of his lungs, and then commanded him again to read. Again, Muhammad said he did not know how to read. This sequence occurred three times before the angel finally told him what the words were on the cloth.

‘Proclaim! (or read!) in the name of thy Lord and

Cherisher, Who created-

Created man, out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood:

Proclaim! And thy Lord is Most Bountiful,

Who taught (the use of) the pen,

Taught man that which he knew not’

This passage was the first revelation of what has become known as the Quran, which is a term related to the command to read or to recite.[8]


So Muhammad was clearly visited by an angel, but what about Joseph Smith? See if you can spot the same broken-legged tracks in the snow. In The History of Joseph Smith, which is an autobiography, we find the following:


While I was thus in the act of calling upon God, I discovered a light appearing in my room, which continued to increase until the room was lighter than at noonday, when immediately a personage appeared at my bedside, standing in the air, for his feet did not touch the floor…

He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Moroni; that God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people.


Does it show yet that Muhammad and Joseph Smith both fall under something bigger? That there is a creature of habit influencing both of them? If you are unconvinced, please keep reading.


They both taught that Jesus was different than what the Bible teaches


Even though they both were alive much later than when the Bible was written, they both taught that Jesus was different than what the Bible describes. Look at what the Quran says about Jesus, which was written 600 years after the time of Jesus:


And their saying: Surely we have killed the Messiah, Isa son of Marium, the messenger of Allah; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like Isa) and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for sure. [158] Nay! Allah took him up to Himself; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.[9]


The question is, should we believe a source that was written much later than the event or would it make more sense to believe a source closer in time to the event? Think about the events of 9/11 for instance. Would journalism be likely more accurate a year after the even or 1000 years after the event, when all the witnesses are dead, and there is so much time for legends to begin cropping up? It seems like a no-brainer.

When we see what Joseph Smith taught about Jesus in the book of Mormon, it is clear that it is a direct and twisted plagiarism of the Bible. In 2 Nephi 25:23, Joseph Smith says, “For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace we are saved, after all we can do.[10]

It might sound ok at first reading, but when the book of Mormon says, “to believe in Christ,” the question is which Christ? On top of this, how can we pull ourselves up by our own boot straps? How can we help in our own salvation?

In Ephesians 2:8-9, we find this: “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.”[11] These two passages have very similar verbiage, yet they describe two very different Saviors. One is like a janitor,[12] sweeping up the mess of moral failures that people leave behind, which ultimately teaches that those who fail morally against God (sin) help reach the goal of their own salvation, and the other (from the Bible) is that salvation is a free gift, and there is nothing we (sinners) can do to earn any part of it.

So the Mormon Jesus or the Quranic Jesus is not the same Jesus that the Bible describes. The Law of Non-contradiction shows us that not all three of these can be true at the same time and in the same sense. All or two of these (between the Bible, the Quran, and the Book of Mormon) must be false. My argument is that the Biblical account is true and the book of Mormon and the Quran are false.


Both taught that the Bible is corrupted


In order for a new religion such as this to work and for converts to be won over to the new religion, there must be an attack on the Bible itself. The Quran teaches that the Bible is corrupted in several passages. Here below is but one:


…they altered the words from their places and they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of; and you shall always discover treachery in them excepting a few of them; so pardon them and turn away; surely Allah loves those who do good (to others). [14] And with those who say, we are Christians, we made a covenant, but they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of, therefore we excited among them enmity and hatred to the day of resurrection; and Allah will inform them of what they did.[13]


As alluded to, it is a basic requirement for a new theistic religion to attack the Bibles’ integrity because everyone knows that the Law of non-contradiction would shut them down. This is why the Bible’s authority must be questioned in order for new doctrines to be taught.

 Similarly, in the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith writes, “For behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.” [14] Again, in the “Articles of Faith” Smith writes, “We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.”[15] In the Bible, there is a curse spelled out for those to add or take away from the Bible: “I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.”[16] Since the Book of Mormon came after the Bible, and adds to the words of the prophecy of the Revelation, then the author is cursed. Deuteronomy 4:2 is often used by Mormons to combat this argument: “You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you.”[17] The problem for Mormonism is that we find that the subject there is on commandments, not on prophecy.

Everyone knows that if you attack the foundation, the whole building falls. But the problem is, the Bible is definitely not corrupted and we have strong evidence that it is not. Critics will often say that the Bible was corrupted and will use the analogy of the children’s game of telephone, which involves a group of kids and it starts with one sentence and is whispered from one child to the next, and by the end, the one sentence was nothing like what the first one heard. The problem with this is that when the gospel writers (for instance) finished their writing, they would give it away to the person to whom they were writing. Then it would get copied by a scribe, and they would get it back and it would be given away again and again. Then the copies of the copies would be copied and it would spread like wildfire. Today, there are over 5,800 ancient New Testament manuscripts in the original language (Koine) from as early as the 2nd century, and if we count the manuscripts collected that were translated into another language, such as Syriac or Latin, there are over 25,000 ancient manuscripts and fragments. In order for biblical corruption to happen, all of these hand written manuscripts would have to be brought back and burned in a pile and rewritten. Needless to say, this would be impossible. We can literally compare and contrast these manuscripts from 2000 years ago forward, and see that any variants or spelling errors by the scribes who copied them, does not amount to any doctrinal or covenantal changes whatsoever.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” This is true even today, and will be for eternity.

They both present challenges to the reader of their supposed sacred books


The gauntlet is thrown at your feet by both of these religions, and more specifically, from both founders. The Quran says, “And if you are in doubt as to that which we have revealed to our servant, then produce a chapter like it and call on your witnesses besides Allah if you are truthful.”[18] Basically what is going on here is that the reader is challenged to create something “as beautiful” as the Quran, because the author of the Quran believes it to be impossible. In any case, this does not attest to the truth of the Quran. For instance, I could not write anything like the Lord of the Rings, yet it is true that someone (clearly) could.

Speaking of such, there is a similar argument for Mormonism, which no one could possibly write something with all of those cities and details of what went on that are in the Book of Mormon, but again, I appeal to Lord of the Rings. Tolkien not only gave every character a name and a story, but also developed worlds and even a language (!).

Similarly to the Quran, Joseph Smith presents a challenge to his readers: “And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things [in the Book of Mormon] are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.[19]

What about those who read the Quran under this principle? Is something true just because I believe it in my heart? Jeremiah 17:9 says that “The heart is deceitful above all things, and beyond cure. Who can understand it?” In other words, don’t think with your heart! One’s feelings should not determine the truth on such matters. 


There is a major focus from both on endless, blissful sex at death

It is interesting that this both of these religions are very man-centered. Not woman-and-man-centered, or just woman, but only man-centered. How can we tell? Because at death, there are endless reward of sex. Muslim men will supposedly get 72 perpetual virgins, and Mormon men will gain endless celestial sex in order to populate their own planet. Note what the Quran states: “Thus (shall it be), and we will wed them with Houris [a beautiful, young virgin companion of a faithful Muslim in heaven] pure, beautiful ones.”[20] Also, “Surely for those who guard (against evil) is achievement, Gardens and vineyards, And voluptuous women of equal age; And a pure cup.”[21] These are not the only places one can find a discussion concerning the rewards in heaven for a Muslim, but the point is made.

In Mormonism, we find the following:


The Savior was begotten by the Father of His spirit, by the same Being who is the Father of our spirits, and that is all the organic difference between Jesus Christ and you and me. And a difference there is between our Father and us consists in that He has gained His exaltation, and has obtained eternal lives. The principle of eternal lives is an eternal existence, eternal duration, eternal exaltation. Endless are His kingdoms, endless His thrones and His dominions, and endless are His posterity; they never will cease to multiply from this time henceforth and forever.[22]


What is scary here is not only the doctrines about the endless celestial sex, but also the amount of differences in theology between Christians and Mormons. It is curious why Mormons want to be labeled just another Christian denomination. The above quote from Joseph Smith should clue us in as to why Mormons will never be considered Christians by Christians. They do not follow the real Jesus. Not only that, but the Mormon Jesus had a beginning, where the Biblical Jesus did not (see John 1:1); the Mormon God was once a regular man as the above citation alludes (as many other passages in Mormon material); the biblical God the Father never had a beginning (see Isaiah 44:8).

The Mormon logic looks like this: from the above citation, we find that the Mormon Jesus was begotten by the Mormon Father. This Mormon Father is also the father of our spirits (implying the existence of the “heavenly mother”). This Mormon Father has gained his exaltation, and because of such, he is the producer of spirit children (through celestial sex). Elsewhere, according to Joseph Smith, we can also have the same exaltation that the Mormon Father has.[23] Marriage is a requirement for this exaltation. This implies that the Mormon God had a beginning, and also that there are multiple “Gods.”

Up to this point, we have several similarities between Mormonism and Islam. Does it make them the same religion? Definitely not. Does it make them connected? I believe so. This list is far from exhaustive. There are many other similarities not mentioned. These comparisons are definitely enough to see the same tracks in the snow, and the “personality” of the demon behind all of this deception.


What other similarities have you noticed between Islam and Mormonism?



Written by Nace Howell through the grace of the Lord Jesus

[1] ESV. Matthew 12:43-45.

[2] ESV. 1 Timothy 4:1-2; emphasis mine.

[3] ESV Matthew 12:22.

[4] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.). Sura 4:3.


[6] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.); emphasis mine. Sura 48:28-29.

[7] Joseph Smith—History. 1:73.


[9] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.). Sura 4:171.

[10] Book of Mormon 2 Nephi 25:23.

[11] ESV Ephesians 2:8-9.

[12] This analogy is from Lynn Wilder’s book, Unveiling Grace.

[13] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.). Sura 5:13-14.

[14] Book of Mormon. 1 Nephi 13:26.

[15] History of the church, Vol. 4, pp. 535-541.

[16] ESV. Revelation 22:18-19.

[17] ESV Deuteronomy 4:2.

[18] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.). Sura 2:23.

[19] Book of Mormon. Moroni 10:4-5.

[20] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.). Sura 44:54.

[21] M. H. Shakir, ed., The Quran (Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library, n.d.). Sura 78:31-34

[22] Journal of Discourses volume 4, page 218.

[23] See Doctrine and Covenants 132:19-38.


Popular posts from this blog

Mormonism Impossible (Part Two): The Law of the Gods

As stated in Part One , “It is no secret that Mormon doctrine teaches that God was once a man on another planet in the distant past, and because he was such a good man on his planet, he was exalted to being the God of his own planet, which we call Earth…” [1] This brings me to another hard question for Mormonism. It concerns the Mormon doctrine of Exaltation .   The following is taken from the LDS website:   What is Exaltation? Exaltation is eternal life, the kind of life God lives. He lives in great glory. He is perfect. He possesses all knowledge and all wisdom. He is the Father of spirit children. He is a creator. We can become like our Heavenly Father. This is exaltation. If we prove faithful to the Lord, we will live in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom of heaven. We will become exalted, to live with our Heavenly Father in eternal families. Exaltation is the greatest gift that Heavenly Father can give His children (see D&C 14:7). [2]   It seems

Mormonism: Impossible (Part One)

Mormon doctrine is logically impossible. It is no secret that Mormon doctrine teaches that God was once a man on another planet in the distant past, and because he was such a good man on his planet, he was exalted to being the God of his own planet, which we call Earth. [1] This seems to lead to the question… How many gods are there in Mormonism ? It seems safe to assume that this man, who became God was not the only person on his planet. The question is, how many other men became Gods of their own planets from this same planet? Further, who was the god of the planet that populated that planet? What planet did he come from? Etc.? Etc.? Do you see the issue here? In order for Mormonism to work, it requires an infinite past. There must be infinite Gods, there must be infinite planets, and there must be an infinite amount of past time.  I want to make this as simple as possible, but even still, it will take some thinking . I can assure that if you think about this an

Joseph Smith was an Elite Atheist (Part Two)

 Joseph Smith was very familiar with the Bible. I would even go further to say that when he was dictating or translating the Book of Mormon (BoM) to his friend Martin Harris that he was frequently reading out of the Bible on account of literary or research fatigue . Untrained people will sometimes make long citations in their writing because they do not want to put the extra work into thinking for themselves. Interestingly enough, the Book of Mormon asks you to compare certain chapters to books in the Bible when the BoM plagiarizes the Bible. Many long passages of Isaiah can be seen in the BoM, but that is not all. There are several passages in the BoM that are clearly taken from the Bible . Not only this, but Joseph Smith even started his own translation of the Bible, which is literally a translation disaster. Take for instance John 1:1 in the Joseph Smith Translation (JST) which was translated from the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible : “In the beginning was the gospel preache

“Those are just Semantics… You are just Playing Word Games.”

Have you ever been accused of this? Why are they word games? Are we just spewing out sounds from our mouth that have no meaning? At this point, when someone is accused of playing words games, if the accusation were true, they might as well be shouting gibberish (unintelligible or meaningless speech or writing).  When one makes the flippant claim after you try to show him or her the truth through logic , that you are playing word games, or that you are just discussing semantics (“pffft” followed by an eye roll), these actually are words with meaning. More frequently than I would like to admit, I hear the misapplied accusation of “semantics” or “word games” used as an argument in order to dismiss what was said before the accusation. The thing is, when someone says this, you can simply ask them what they mean. Likely, they will just tell you that you are playing with words. Here is how to show them that they are misunderstanding. It is very simple Think of the sounds that come

The Jehovah's Witness Training Videos

How your conversation will likely go with a Jehovah's Witness. The Videos… they have all seen them. The videos that they have seen are like when you start a new job and watch these old, poor quality, cheesy DVDs (or VHS) about how your job is performed safely. You’re sitting in the room alone for three hours and fifteen minutes, watching everyone in their PPE do the wrong things and then the right things, so you can know the difference between them. Anyone who has worked at Wal-Mart, or a factory, or is a heavy equipment operator knows exactly what “the videos” look and sound like. Jehovah’s Witnesses (Hereafter, JWs) must go through a similar situation because their responses to my questions and challenges is exactly the same, often verbatim. I have to assume that they have all seen the same video. I have not seen the videos myself, but I definitely seem to have a cumulative case for believing that they exist. Granted, this group of JWs I'm referring to are the mentors of the

Defending Christianity against Mormonism

“But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect ” (NIV 1 Peter 3:15). In other words, LOVE THEM . Mormons                                                             Biblical Truths Mormons are polytheistic, meaning, they believe in many gods, yet worship only one (monolatry). LDS believe that “As man is, God once was; and as God is, man may become.” LDS do not believe in Hell. LDS believe God is flesh and bones. LDS believe in baptism for the dead. LDS believe Jesus and Satan are created brothers. LDS do not believe in the Trinity. LDS believe that “it is by grace we are saved, after all we can do” (Nephi 25:23). Deuteronomy 6:4 says, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one” (See also Isaiah 43:11; Acts 5:4; 1 Timothy 2:5; Exodus 20:3; e

What is Adultery? Is remarriage ever permitted? What about Spousal Abuse? How do we move forward?

Grizzly Bear track, Rocky Mountains, Montana. The Seventh Commandment tells us in Exodus chapter twenty to not commit adultery. “You shall not commit adultery” is verbatim in most popular translations. But what does this mean? It seems that sometimes it is thought that adultery only means unfaithful to one’s spouse. But other times Jesus says things like “ Even if you marry someone who has been married then you have committed adultery ” (paraphrase of Matthew 5:32). I think the best way to answer the question of adultery is to think one step further. I think we should answer biblically speaking, the grounds for remarriage . Reaching further would give the argument greater strength. It seems that the Bible defines three areas for remarriage, but we should continue to refine the standard from which to catapult. In 1 Timothy chapter three, we observe the qualifications of an overseer. In this, Paul says that one of the qualifications must be that he is to be a “Μιᾶς γυναικὸ

Can a Christian be Possessed?

            When she came into the church office, I thought, “This... must be some kind of a joke.” She was dressed in all black. Her coat was very thick and she had long stringy jet black hair, wore a black hat, and carried a black bag. Her face was pale with very dark lipstick and she was likely in her early 60’s. She appeared to be unnaturally thin. She did not set up a meeting, but just came in and said that she needed to speak with me privately about something. It was a bitterly cold morning in the middle of January '17 in the Rocky Mountains, and I invited her in to sit with me in the office (as opposed to my study, which does not have a camera). She smelled of smoke, not from any local forest fire, but perhaps of a Marlboro, and she sat down across from the desk, trembling in fear. I asked her what I could help her with, and she told me that she was terrified. She did not go into great detail about why she was terrified, but the look in her eyes told me that she believ

Mormonism Impossible (Part Three): The Greatest Conceivable Being

Latter-Day Saints' monolatrism proves monotheism to be true.  I recently emailed a member of the LDS because I wanted to see how he might answer my question regarding some material in Mormonism Impossible Part Two . Specifically, I wanted to see what some of them thought about the Law of the Gods . [1] As in, what exactly causes it. Where did this Law that says men can become gods come from? Read my question below:   I have questions that lead to other questions about LDS doctrine. I am genuinely curious about how this all makes sense. For starters, I understand that if a member of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints lives a holy life, that when they die and go on to the celestial kingdom, they become gods. I know that some members shy away from this teaching, but it is what I find in D&C. So, whether or not LDS become a god of their own planet, I am not completely certain, other than what I see in D&C, which seems to teach that this is the case. Since

A Problem We Face After Becoming a Christian and How to Deal with It (How a Classical Apologist uses Presuppositionalism)

We know of the first problem the Bible presents, that there is a separation between God and man, and we know that Jesus alone is the mediator, the Savior, our redeemer, and our solution to the problem. Many of us however, do not understand the (second) problem we face after we are saved from our sins. Paul, on a huge discourse about the Law and sin in Romans, comes to a place inevitably examining his own sin. He says in Romans 7: Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. 15 For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. 17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.