The Logic of our Existence

People have asked for centuries what is the meaning of our existence? Why? What is it all for? Here we logically examine these questions and see how the LDS Church is the only thing that makes sense.

It is a little long, but worth it. It is also only version 1.0, so expect a lot more information to be added or clarified in the near future. If you would like to be notified when new information is added, please subscribe to our email list.*

(*If the popup to join does not appear, you may need to pause your Adblocker and reload the page).

Let’s begin:

The Cause of our Existence

  1. We exist. (Self-evident)
  2. There was a “cause” for our existence. (Usage like “cause” of fire: arson, lightning, etc.)
  3. Our parents “caused” our existence, and our grandparents “caused” our parents existence, all the way back to a singular event that “caused” our first ancestors to exist on this world.
  4. There are only two types of “causes” that are conceivable for that singular event that created our first ancestors: natural or supernatural.
  5. Atheism rejects supernatural “causes” for our existence.
    1. Note the very suffix “-ism” in a word indicates a belief system or position. Breaking down the word atheism it means a- / not, theos / god, -ism / belief or literally, believes there is no god. Although some use a “lack of belief” in god.
    2. While certain Atheists can believe in the supernatural (like ghosts, demons, etc.) Atheism does not ascribe them as having the power of creation needed for our existence.
  6. The only “cause” for our existence that Atheists can believe is natural.
  7. Naturalism is the belief system, or position, that everything arises from natural “causes”.
  8. It follows that all Atheists are “naturalists” concerning the origin of our existence and that naturalism is a conditional subset of Atheism.
  9. Natural “causes” have the ability to be scientifically examined and falsified. (We can rule out “causes” of fire by eliminating lightning on a clear day).
  10. The first “cause” of our existence that naturalism theorizes is called abiogenesis (a- / not, bio / life, genesis / beginning). We can test this theory by examining the scientific principles that govern chemistry.
  11. The Minimum Total Potential Energy Principle (MTPEP) alone falsifies Abiogenesis by showing how chemicals could NOT “evolve” into complex macromolecules needed for life.
    1. The MTPEP explains why a structure or body deforms or displaces to a position that minimizes the total potential energy like:
      1. A rubber band or spring – the least amount of potential energy is when unsprung, and when stretched the system seeks to be sprung.
      2. A rock at the bottom of a mountain. Rocks at rest have a lower potential energy and do not fall uphill.
      3. A snowflake has the least amount of potential energy when water freezes, but why not 6 foot snowflakes? Too much potential energy.
      4. Uranium has potential energy that decreases during radioactive decay. No new uranium is naturally forming here on Earth because uranium has more potential energy than its daughter isotopes.
    2. The molecules that make up life (DNA, RNA, unfolded proteins) have potential energy. Even the building blocks that make up those molecules have potential energy. That potential energy wants to be released. That is why they break down instead of building up. Another term for the potential energy contained in molecules is measured by its chemical stability.
    3. The half-life decay of these molecules is one of the laws that confirm the Total Minimum Potential Energy Principle, showing that they are not stable – they have too much potential energy. Stanley Miller, same guy of THE famous 1953 Miller-Urey experiment, continued to perform experiments later in his life.
      1. In a similar experiment in 1995 Stanley Miller had tested ribose, which is a sugar. It is the “backbone” of RNA (Ribonucleic Acid) and DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid), and could not exist without ribose.
        “Sugars are known to be unstable in strong acid or base, but there are few data for neutral solutions. Therefore, we have measured the rate of decomposition of ribose between pH 4 and pH 8 from 40 degrees C to 120 degrees C. The ribose half-lives are very short (73 min at pH 7.0 and 100 degrees C and 44 years at pH 7.0 and 0 degrees C). These results suggest that the backbone of the first genetic material could not have contained ribose or other sugars because of their instability.”
        Some people suggest that because ribose is so difficult to synthesize there must have been a precursor, something else to take its place. However, ribose is what exists today. If life started with something else, chemistry makes it extremely difficult to try to replace it because of bonding issues.
      2. In working with the nucleobases [A]denine, [U]racil, [G]uanine, [C]ytosine, and [T]hymine (very tiny building blocks of RNA – Ribonucleic Acid and DNA – Deoxyribonucleic Acid) in 1998, Stanley Miller had this to say about the half-lives of the molecules in a peer reviewed study:
        “… the half-lives are too short to allow for the adequate accumulation of these compounds.
        We show here that the rapid rates of hydrolysis of the nucleobases A, U, G, C, and T at temperatures much above 0°C would present a major problem in the accumulation of these presumed essential compounds on the early Earth. A high-temperature origin of life involving these compounds therefore is unlikely. These results are applicable to any origin-of-life theory in which life begins with the evolution of a self-replicating genetic system capable of undergoing Darwinian evolution.”
      3. These experiments were done representing an open system. When you add heat (energy), it simulates the open system of our earth and the energy received from the sun.
  12. There are many other laws that prohibit life from forming; these laws include, but are not limited to:
    1. Water – Water is necessary for life, but it is also toxic to the molecules that make up life. These principles show why life could not have been naturally created in water.
      1. Hydrolysis – Water is a solvent. Molecules needed for life, like RNA, ATP, and polypeptides dissolve in water (like salt) through a process called hydrolysis. This is a good thing as water breaks down and transports nutrients to, and removes waste from, living things. It’s a bad thing for abiogenesis as the chemicals needed for their theories are destroyed by hydrolysis.
      2. Hydrophobic vs. Hydrophilic – Certain molecules love water and others have a phobia of water, that is they are repelled by water instead of dissolving. Oil is hydrophobic, which is why it separates from water in different layers. Certain amino acids needed for life are also hydrophobic. This is a good thing because when proteins are formed, these amino acids create a protective shell around the protein that repels the water. This keeps the proteins safe from hydrolysis. This is a bad thing for abiogenesis as these needed molecules stay separated from each other by water.
      3. Le Chatelier’s principle – This is a pressure principle that shows how condensation reactions (like those used to create phosphodiester bonds that link RNA) cannot form in water. Condensation reactions are opposite hydrolysis reactions. Condensation creates water, and the principle says you cannot create more water in water. This is why condensation occurs outside a water glass, but not in the water. This is a bad thing for abiogenesis as the needed reactions to produce life can NOT occur directly in water.
      4. Due to these issues virtually all experiments in abiogenesis eliminate water.
    2. Oxygen – This particular subject is so damning to theories of abiogenesis that they have had to introduce an “oxygen-free atmosphere” during the early earth period. Yet, this theory ignores the fact that oxygen is the most abundant element in the earth’s crust (including lava) and the second most abundant in oceans in the form of dihydrogen monoxide (H2O = water). I’m
      1. Free radicals/oxidation – Oxygen is very reactive with building blocks of life. As a free radical, oxygen has an unpaired electron that bonds more readily with RNA instead of the molecules RNA needs. This process is called oxidation, and it’s very destructive to RNA/DNA, even in life itself. This is why we take antioxidants like vitamin C, E, and beta carotene to remove this bad oxygen.
      2. Ozone – Oxygen, in the form of O3, is what creates the ozone layer that protects the earth from the Sun’s radiation. Without oxygen in the atmosphere, ozone couldn’t form and outside of water the molecules of life would be burned to a cinder.
    3. Sun (UV radiation) – Regardless of ozone, radiation in the form of high-frequency light waves and other particles bombards our earth. These intense breaks bonds destroying the molecules.
    4. Heat (thermal destruction or lack of reactivity) – Adding a source of energy is what directly defines an open system, as opposed to a closed system that removes any heat sources to determine the reactions. Lava and lightning can produce direct heat from lava as well as radiant heat agitates molecules and causes their structure to break down. The higher the heat, the faster they break down and the more thorough that breakdown is. Cold, on the other hand, makes molecules non-reactive.
    5. Homochirality (racemic enantiomer contamination) – The molecules that form life have an end that stick out like a thumb. They are referred to as “right-” (D-) and “left-” (L-) handed enantiomers. In life, proteins are all formed with “left-handed” (L-) amino acids so they can “fold” properly, like a 3-D puzzle. RNA is created with “right-handed” (D-) sugars (ribose). However, when amino acids are formed they are created in equal amounts D- and L-. For example, d-alpha tocopherol is the natural chiral form of vitamin E, and dl-alpha tocopherol is the synthetic mix of enantiomers. So the problem is, chemistry alone can’t select a chiral L- when D- exists equally in that mix.
    6. Mathematics (sheer probabilities) – even if the materials could have existed (which they didn’t), and the previous laws of chemistry were suspended (which they weren’t):
      1. The chances of creating a 900 base pair RNA strand coded to create a small protein just 300 amino acids long are roughly one in 7.144 × 10541 (which equates to 0.0000000000…with 530 more zeroes…1399%) – basically a zero percent chance of getting the correct one. You have better chances of a single person buying a single ticket and winning the Powerball lottery, every week, for an entire year, without fail. If you lost even one week, you would have to start over. And that’s for ONE RNA strand that is needed for life. (Click here for the formulas.)
      2. The smallest known “free living” organism, Pelagibacter ubique, has 1,308,759 base pairs of DNA, meaning you would have to win a year’s worth of Powerball lotteries more than 1.5 million times to create it from scratch. Parasites such as Mycoplasma genitalium, other symbionts and viruses, are not free living and cannot survive without a secondary host. Therefore, the first “free living” proto-cell could not have been much smaller. And for nature to create two smaller “non-free living” cells, a parasite and a host would have been just as difficult if not more.
      3. Human beings have 3,088,286,401 base pairs for DNA. The odds of evolution just got inconceivably smaller. But that’s for another day. You can’t get from muck to men if you can’t even get out of the muck.
  13. The scientific laws in #11 and #12 provide sufficient evidence that any natural “cause” concerning the origin of our existence (abiogenesis) has essentially been scientifically falsified. There are no scientific laws, zero physical or chemical laws, pointing to life. All laws direct chemicals and molecules away from creating it. Life could not have formed if the building blocks did not exist, or if (and it’s a really big IF) the molecules were spontaneously created they were in a constant state of breaking down. Life only exists because life creates life through the manufacturing of its own components.
  14. It follows that naturalism is absolutely false, and because  #7 Atheism is a false religion teaching false doctrine.
  15. The only other “cause” for our existence is supernatural.
  16. Therefore, God (as defined as a Creator or a “supernatural cause”) must exist.


Our Creator is “Good”

  1. Our existence, and this world we exist on, is profoundly beautiful and amazing.
  2. Our universe has been finely tuned (perfect physical universal laws) so as to create a “Goldilocks planet” where life can thrive. There are approximately 40 criteria for life. Some important ones are:
    1. Suitable star: a yellow G-class sun that is the right temperature and give off the right light waves.
    2. Just-right distance from the sun: further would be too cold, closer too hot.
    3. Just-right tilt (rotational axis): allows seasons and moderation of temperatures. No tilt would cause the equator to superheat and to poles to freeze. Full tilt would heat only one pole.
    4. Just-right rotation speed: faster would cause too-high winds, slower would heat one side too much.
    5. Just-right size: bigger would create heaver atmosphere with toxic elements, smaller not enough oxygen and CO2.
    6. Iron core: creates a magnetic field for protection from sun’s radiation.
    7. Tectonic plates: creates mountains for life-giving rain.
    8. Liquid water: a solvent that transports many essential nutrients needed for life.
  3. Only a morally “good” Creator would create something so beautiful and finely tuned.
  4. A morally “evil” creator would create a sadistic cosmos with chaotic, undefined natural laws. Or, one so rigid it would lack adaptation.
  5. The “Christian God” has the only creation story that matches scientific evidence.
  6. God, as defined by Christianity, is omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), and omnibenevolent (all-kind).
  7. Yet evil exists (a.k.a. The Problem of Evil)
    1. An omnibenevolent being would want to prevent all evils.
    2. An omniscient being knows every way in which evils can come into existence, and knows every way in which those evils could be prevented.
    3. An omnipotent being has the power to prevent that evil from coming into existence.
    4. A being who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, who is able to prevent that evil from coming into existence, and who wants to do so, would prevent the existence of that evil.
  8. Using omnipotent power to prevent evil is more evil when it causes a greater evil, or sacrifices the greater good.
  9. God cannot prevent certain evils without causing more evil. God cannot lie. God cannot create a paradox. Omnipotent does not mean the ability do anything/everything imagined.
  10. Taking away human moral agency (the ability to choose) is a greater evil than the evils humans with agency could cause. (The book “1984”, mind control, puppeteer.)
  11. Taking away human moral agency prevents learning, consequences, and judgement. A man cannot be judged or rewarded properly based on what he could have or would have done as much as what he did do.
  12. Arbitrarily interfering directly with human caused (anthropogenic) evil creates a slippery slope, in that he would have to interfere with the next one, and the next, slowly taking away moral agency. (Although He may intervene by warning and protecting someone when asked through prayer – which then is not arbitrary.)
  13. Arbitrarily altering natural or physical laws to prevent suffering is wrong since humans would not be able to trust those laws. (i.e., altering the laws surrounding tectonic plates that create beautiful mountains and life-giving rain to prevent earthquakes, or altering laws of cell mutation, adaptation, and variety to prevent disease. See #4.)
  14. Evil and suffering (both human and nature caused), therefore, must exist for the greater good of mankind to learn compassion, justice, mercy, love, empathy, sorrow, and joy.
  15. One cannot know true joy without sorrow – which joy, ironically, comes from overcoming and achieving victory over those trials and sorrows.
  16. A “morally evil” creator would not want his creation to experience feelings like peace, love, hope, or joy.
  17. We can feel peace, love, hope, and joy.
  18. Therefore, our creator is not “morally evil”.
  19. Yet, evil does exist. It must be a diametrically opposed force that could both tempt mankind to commit evil (anthropogenic evil) and directly cause natural evils. (Maybe “evil” with a “d” in front.)
  20. According to #1-3 and by not allowing #10-13, it follows that God must be “morally good”.



  1. A “morally good” God would live by good rules and laws.
  2. A “morally good” God would want his creation to live by good rules and laws.
  3. A “morally evil” devil would want to oppose those rules and laws.
  4. A “morally good” God would want to communicate those rules with his creation.
  5. Since God is good, His message would be Good as well. (Gospel = good news)
  6. There are billions (with a “b”) of eyewitness accounts of God communicating with man in some form or another that exist across all religions, peoples, and nations throughout history.
  7. Those eyewitness accounts testify of “good” experiences with God (feelings of peace, love, hope, joy).
  8. Certain eyewitnesses have more powerful experiences than other eyewitnesses.
  9. It is possible for the strongest eyewitnesses to communicate directly with God, to see and talk with Him. (For example, Moses and 73 others saw God and talked directly with Him – Exodus 24:9-11.)
  10. There are innumerable eyewitness accounts of communicating with devils/demons that exist.
  11. These eyewitness accounts tell of a “bad” experience with devils/demons.
  12. Many eyewitnesses record their accounts.
  13. We can compare recorded eyewitness accounts for differences and similarities.
  14. We can trust those accounts that have more similarities over time (historical evidence), and discount those that do not.
  15. We also have the ability to pray and ask to receive our own account (although failure to receive our own account does not discredit other accounts).
  16. Therefore, a “true” religion must exist based on His rules and laws and revealed through those eyewitness accounts.
  17. To find a “true” religion we must examine its teachings based on a “morally good” Creator, and it must keep Him “good”.


Life After Death

  1. One consistent and logical narrative of eyewitness accounts throughout history is that we will live on after we die as an immortal soul. The vast majority of religions accept it, believe it, and teach it.
  2. Tens of thousands of current eyewitness accounts of life after death exist through Near Death Experiences (NDEs).
  3. The narrative of religions and NDEs include that when we die there will be a judgement based on the works we performed, both good and evil.
  4. The destination of those who did good we will call heaven. (This includes the belief for those who become enlightenedMoksha – and break the samsara rebirth cycle according to Hinduism/Buddhism.)
  5. For those who were not worthy of heaven, we will call their destination hell.
  6. A “morally good” God would have to judge all of human kind fairly. Any unfairness would prove God unjust, and therefore, proving God evil. (The “judge” in Buddhism/Hinduism is karma. For Islam it is Allah.)
  7. Sorites paradox of sins – how many “sins” can someone have and still be allowed in heaven, or before they are sent to hell? Where is the “line”?
    1. Sending any innocent, newborn babe (having no sin) to hell based on his or her lack of belief, understanding, knowledge, or works is unfair. (The major religions teach that babies go to hell, specifically Christianity through “original sin”, and the children of Islam’s “enemies” – especially Jews.) If an innocent baby dies and gets to go to heaven
    2. It is unfair for other children who commit one single sin before they die and get sent to hell. (Especially when he/she could have gone to heaven by dying moments earlier before committing that first sin.) However, if a child with one sin gets to go to heaven…
    3. Sending any individual that has many sins and dies to hell based on his/her lack of knowledge or understanding of the rules is unfair. (A child raised by Atheist parents, a teenager in the backwaters of Africa/Amazon, a monk in the far reaches of China, a mentally disabled adult.) Yet, if these people go to heaven…
    4. Sending someone like Mother Teresa to hell because of her “evil” works to live with Adolph Hitler is unfair.
    5. Sending Adolph Hitler to heaven because of his “good” works to live with Mother Teresa is unfair.
  8. The place of hell itself (a place where His creation is tortured by fire forever and ever, with no reprieve, ever) is not consistent with a “morally good” God.  It therefore follows that the major religions of Christianity and Islam that use this definition are inconsistent with a “morally good” God as it violates #1-2 under Our Creator is “Good”.
  9. A heaven and hell based on a graduated scale, with various levels of reward and punishment, would keep God “morally good”.
  10. Hinduism/Buddhism comes close to this idea, however, the idea of karma is unfair as it places one at a disadvantaged station in the samsara rebirth cycle, “torturing” them on Earth over and over forever, with little chance of reprieve (especially since we do not remember the understanding we had previously gained). Karma is inescapable.
  11. As per above, there is no fair way for God (or karma) to judge all of human kind by Himself based on beliefs, understanding, and works.
  12. If God is unfair, He is unjust. If God is unjust, He is evil. This is not consistent with our logic above that our Creator is “morally good”.


A Mediator

  1. Since we have logically concluded God is “morally good”, He must be fair and just. As such, the only way to keep that conclusion is there must be an “impartial” third party to mediate between God and man.
  2. Christianity teaches of an “impartial” third party that mediates between God and man, Jesus of Nazareth who lived as a man. He understands man’s sorrows, so that MAN judges man.
  3. Jesus was the most influential person to have ever lived. More than half the planet considers Him important and significant.
    1. Jesus has been identified as a real historical figure by scholars. There are almost no modern scholars that reject his human existence.
    2. Jesus is believed to be a prophet by Muslims, and is taught about throughout the Quran.
    3. Jesus is believed to be divine by Christians.
  4. Most people accept Jesus’ baptism and crucifixion as historical fact.
  5. His tomb was empty.
  6. Witnesses claim to have seen Jesus after his death:
    1. Mary and the 11 remaining apostles see him any times during the following 40 day period (John 20:14-29; Acts 1:3-11).
    2. Stephen claimed to see Jesus standing on the right hand of God (Acts 7:55 – see D&C 76:20-23).
    3. Paul claims more than 500 men, not including women/children, saw him (1 Corinthians 15:6).
    4. Paul sees Jesus twice, first in an unpleasant experience (Acts 9:3-6) and again in the temple (Acts 22:17-21). Ananias, who heals Paul, sees Jesus as well (Acts 9:10-16).
  7. Historically, thousands were persecuted, tortured, and brutally killed because of their witness and belief in a resurrected Jesus Christ.
  8. Jesus is the best candidate for a mediator between God and Man.
  9. However, Christianity has relegated this mediator to being unfair. While trying to keep God “good”, the mediator is evil if innocent babies are still sent to hell.
  10. If God appoints an evil mediator, then God himself is still evil…
  11. Unless the circumstances we are judged on change. We must be judged on more than our works, knowledge, and understanding in this life.
  12. IF we are allowed to accept this mediator as our judge AFTER we are dead, this would make the mediator fair and keep God good.
  13. IF all that was required to go to heaven was to accept this mediator, it would place everyone on an equal footing to be judged. It would keep God good.
  14. However, this judgement still has the potential of placing Adolf Hitler in heaven with Mother Teresa, which is unfair, unless there is a graduated heaven.
  15. Using a graduated heaven, endowing Mother Teresa with a much higher reward in heaven and Adolf Hitler with a smaller reward keeps God fair.
  16. There is only one religion that teaches that the acceptance of a mediator in this life or the next that allows one to go to a graduated heaven, and that our works determine our reward in that heaven… Mormonism (a.k.a. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints).
  17. Mormonism is the only religion that keeps God “good”.


The True Church

  1. The founder of Mormonism is Joseph Smith, who claimed it was a restoration of the Early Church before it got corrupted.
  2. Joseph Smith claimed to have an eyewitness account directly with Jesus at least three times, two were with others.
    1. The First Vision – although there are varying accounts of exactly what saw, the majority claim he saw Jesus (“the Lord”).
    2. Joseph and Sidney Rigdon claimed to see Jesus “standing on the right hand of the Father” and “conversed” with Him. (D&C 76:14-23)
    3. Joseph and Oliver Cowdery claimed to see Jesus standing on “a paved work of pure gold” and spoke with Him. (D&C 110:2-4)
    4. None ever denied their eyewitness accounts.
  3. Joseph Smith understood the logic here concerning a “morally good” God. Much of it is addressed in The Book of Mormon and expounded upon in the Doctrine and Covenants.
  4. The Book of Mormon settles most of Christianity’s inherent problems and flaws. These are uniquely Mormon doctrines that fixes Christianity:
    1. Personage of Jesus – had a spirit body before his birth and a resurrected physical body after his death – Ether 3:9-16 and 3 Nephi 11:14-15.
    2. Infant Baptism/Without Law – Moroni 8:8,22. (The “whole” need no physician and do not go to hell.)
    3. Faith – Alma 32:26-43 (One really needs to know Evangelical Christianity’s flaws of how they “receive faith” to understand how unique a doctrine this is.)
    4. Unlimited Atonement/Ability – 2 Nephi 9:7-16 (Again, a unique counter argument against Calvinism’s “Limited Atonement”.)
    5. Justice – Alma 41:3-7 (Again, another unique counter to Sola Fide – Justification by Faith – that justice will be done based on works and the law of restoration.)
    6. Reason for Evil – 2 Nephi 2:11-13, 26-27 (Opposition in all things. Christians can’t explain it.)
    7. The Fall – 2 Nephi 2:22-25 (Beautifully explained as unavoidably necessary, since all of Christianity think the Fall to be a huge mistake.)
    8. Salvation – 2 Nephi 31:17-20 (Counters “once saved, always saved”. We need baptism then endure to the end – don’t leave the path, repent if you do.)
    9. Transubstantiation – 3 Nephi 18:7,11 (No “presence” in the bread and wine.) See also D&C 20:40,75 (emblems).
    10. Need for more than Bible – 2 Nephi 29 (A Bible! A Bible!…)
    11. Many more including, but not limited to, Atheist responses, ordination, authority, fasting, prophets, “the call”, general resurrection, religious experience/regeneration, repentance/penance, church government, etc.
  5. The teachings of Joseph Smith must match historical accounts and records.
  6. Plurality of Gods – Trinity is corrupt. “[T]he doctrine of a plurality of Gods is as prominent in the Bible as any other doctrine.” -Joseph Smith (1844)
    1. Origen, in a council of Christian bishops discusses “two Gods”, Jesus and the Father, and how they are “one God”. He demonstrates this using collective nouns. (Dialogue of Origen with Heraclides ca. 235AD)
    2. Tertullian writes, “we…do indeed definitively declare that Two beings are God, the Father and the Son” (ca. 180AD)
    3. Greek: Homoousion – means “same”/”being” – rejected by three Church councils in Antioch ca. 260AD before being accepted into the Nicene Creed in 325AD to define the Trinity.
    4. Greek: Ton Theon means THE God, but ton (“the”) is dropped when translating “God” in the New Testament. It is also interchanged with the more generic theos as “god”. However, in the original Greek text ton theon is used throughout the New Testament when referring specifically to The Father. Example: John 1:1 in Greek reads – kai ho Logos ēn pros ton Theon (and the Word was with THE God), kai Theos ēn ho Logos (and God was the Word).
    5. Hebrew: the suffix -im is plural form. Elohim (plural form of Eloah) is used over 2,500 times in the Old Testament and translated mostly as “God”. Eloah (singular form for “God”) is only used about 300 times. (“God” as a collective works here).
    6. The singular form “God” can be a collective noun that has a plural context. Words like family, government, team, (human) race, church, etc. have a plural context. The belief in “God” can still be monotheistic by believing in one, singular collective. This would make more sense making elohim a collective noun.
  7. Water Baptism (necessary for salvation) – “Baptism is a sign to God … that we do the will of God, and there is no other way beneath the heavens whereby God hath ordained for man to come to Him to be saved, and enter into the kingdom of God, except faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, and baptism for the remission of sins
    1. St. Augustine (400AD) – “By all these considerations it is proved that the sacrament of baptism is one thing, the conversion of the heart another; but that man’s salvation is made complete through the two together.” AND, “Take away the water, it is no baptism; take away the Word, it is no baptism.”
    2. Clement of Rome (90AD) – “What does the baptism of water contribute towards the worship of God? In the first place, because that which hath pleased God is fulfilled. In the second place, because when you are regenerated and born again of water and of God, the frailty of your former birth, which you have through men, is cut off, and so at length you shall be able to attain salvation.
    3. Justin Martyr – “Then [new converts] are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water.”
    4. Tertullian – “[N]o one can attain salvation without baptism, especially in view of the declaration of the Lord, who says, ‘Unless a man shall be born of water, he shall not have life.’ (see John 3:5)”
    5. Irenaeus – “For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions; being spiritually regenerated as new-born babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.’ (John 3:5)”
    6. Irenaeus – “this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole [Christian] faith.”
  8. Laying on of Hands for the Gift of the Holy Ghost (also known as Imposition of Hands by the Early Church) – “You might as well baptize a bag of sand as a man, if not done in view of the remission of sins and getting of the Holy Ghost. Baptism by water is but half a baptism, and is good for nothing without the other half—that is, the baptism of the Holy Ghost.” (Joseph Smith, 1844)
    1. “But if regeneration is in the washing, that is, in baptism… one is not born by the imposition of hands when he receives the Holy Ghost, but in baptism, that so, being already born, he may receive the Holy Spirit.”
    2. “the act of baptism itself too is [physical], in that we are plunged in water, but the effect spiritual, in that we are freed from sins. In the next place the hand is laid on us, invoking and inviting the Holy Spirit through benediction.” (Tertullian, On Baptism, ch. 7&8)
    3. “For neither can the Spirit act without the water, nor the water without the Spirit. Ill, therefore, for themselves do some interpret, saying that by imposition of hands they receive the Holy Ghost, and are received into the Church, when it is manifest that they ought to be born again by both sacraments.” (Augustine,
  9. Becoming like God (deification) – “You have to learn how to be Gods yourselves” -Joseph Smith (1844). ***A word of warning here — This does NOT mean we will be gods unto ourselves and have our own planet. Nowhere is that taught by any Church leader or prophet. We will always be subject to Jesus Christ and His Father.*** Many (almost all) early Christian leaders taught this, and none taught against it. Here are only a few quotes among many:
    1. Athanasius (350AD) – “The Word was made flesh in order that we might be made gods. …Just as the Lord, putting on the body, became a man, so also we men are both deified through his flesh, and henceforth inherit everlasting life.”
    2. Clement of Alexandria (180AD) – “For if one knows himself, he will know God; and knowing God, he will be made like God.”
    3. Irenaeus (180AD) – “[God] became what we are in order to make us what he is himself.” and “If the Word (Jesus) became a man, it was so men may become gods.”
    4. Augustine of Hippo (400AD) – “’For He hath given them power to become the sons of God.'(John 1:12) If we have been made sons of God, we have also been made gods.”
    5. Gregory of Nazianzus (350AD) – “become gods for His sake, since He became man for our sake.”
    6. Basil of Caesarea (350AD) – “becoming a god is the highest goal of all.”
  10. The Gospel of Philip (an Early Christian Document) found with the Nag Hammadi Library teaches temple ordinances much like we have today. Here are some quotes:
    1. “The lord did everything in a mystery: a baptism and a chrism and a eucharist and a redemption and a bridal chamber.”
    2. “Baptism is “the Holy” building. Redemption is the “Holy of the Holy”. “The Holy of the Holies” is the bridal chamber.”
    3. Initiatory – Greek: chrism (literal translation: anointing with oil). “The chrism is superior to baptism, for it is from the word Chrism that we have been called Christians, certainly not because of the word baptism.”
    4. Endowment ceremony – matches the Redemption, being brought to the veil and “redeemed” to God.
    5. Celestial Marriage – “One receives them from the mirrored bridal chamber” and “the woman is united to her husband in the bridal chamber. Indeed, those who have united in the bridal chamber will no longer be separated.”
  11. Joseph Smith did not know, and could not have known, much of anything of what these early Christian leaders taught. He quotes absolutely none of them for support. Some writings, including Dialogue with Heraclides and Gospel of Philip, were not dug up until the 1940s (100 years after Joseph’s death). Others were buried so deep in monasteries that even the mere mention of their “heresies” would have someone burning on a pyre.
  12. Joseph Smith understood too much of the logic of our existence and knew too much of the teachings of the Early Church. He did not get that knowledge from books. He was uneducated. He had no access to the Internet, nor to the writings of the Early Church Fathers. His knowledge could have only come from revelation. If he received revelation, he must have been a prophet.
  13. Since Mormonism is the only religion that keeps God “morally good”, and Joseph Smith knew the things that matched historical teachings, it follows that after eliminating the impossible, no matter how improbable it may seem to others, Mormonism must be the true church.

I exist, therefore I am a Mormon.