I read Brian Leftow’s chapter “Anti Social Trinitarian” in The Trinity (edited by Stephen T. Davis, Daniel Kendall, and Gerald O’Collins).

HT:  Scott Weber

Folks, you need to read Leftow, especially in light of Blake Ostler’s engagement with Swinburne in the third book of his series.

Brian writes,

. . . suppose that Christianity counts as monotheist by meeting conditions on the Persons’ links of origin, necessity of existence, likeness of nature, and agreement in action.  Then if it failed one of these conditions, Christianity would not be monotheist.  Thus, Swinburne’s account entails that since Father and Son always agree, Christianity is monotheist, but if they disagreed (and how much?), it would not be.  This is not plausible.  Deities’ conduct does not seem the sort of thing that makes a religion monotheist.  If it were, there would have to be good answers to such questions as these:  why must gods disagree, rather than just differ in will, to make a religion polytheist?  Just how much divine disagreement makes a religion polytheist?  Is there a sharp cutoff point for monotheism?  (If there is not, then there can be religions which are neither mono- nor poly-theist,  since of course there is a continuous scale of degrees of divine likeness and behavioural conformity.)  Where does it come?  Why just there?  These do not look like questions with plausible answers.

Let’s go back 90 years.

I have sitting on my desk, Missions (Vol. 12-No. 4, April 1921), A Baptist Monthly Magazine published by the General Board of Promotion of the Northern Baptist Convention.  I have a whole stack of these, saved by my grandfather.

(To give you a little context:  The Northern Baptist Convention was forged about a decade earlier.  But in the 1920s, there were monumental clashes between the liberals and fundamentalists in the Convention.)

In this magazine, the Rev. George L. White, Joint Division Secretary of the Home Mission and Publication Societies wrote an article entitled, “The Astonishing Growth of Mormonism”.

If you hear the total membership of the Mormon church in a certain district stated, the figures are interesting, but they do not mean so much as they do when placed in comparison with others more familiar to us.  For that reason I have taken the last United States Religious Census and have made the following tables which show the number of Mormons in the West as compared with the number of Baptist church members.

We have read much about the progressive Baptist missionary work in the State of Idaho, and we have been quite proud of it.  The last census shows that we have 61 churches in that state, and 5,682 members.  We are somewhat shocked when we learn that the Mormons have 235 churches in Idaho, with 73,065 members.   It is truly surprising to learn that in that part of our Northern Baptist Convention which lies west of the Mississippi River, sixteen states, the census shows that the Mormons have 391,653 members, as compared with 284,640 Baptist church members, or 107,013 more than we have.

Mormon and Baptist Church Membership in Those States of the Northern Baptist Convention Which Are West of the Mississippi River:

Arizona – Mormons (47 churches – 12,624 members) vs. Baptists (44 churches – 2,927 members)

California – (31 – 5,482) vs. (279 – 42,639)

Colorado – (23 – 5,555) vs. (121 – 18,548)

Idaho – (235 – 73,065) vs. (61 – 5,682)

Iowa – (74 – 10,274) vs. (403 – 47,863)

Kansas – (25 – 2,601) vs. (533 – 60,756)

Minnesota – (8 – 849) vs. (239 – 28,624)

Montana – (15 – 2,099) vs. (44 – 4,073)

Nebraska – (22 – 2,251) vs. (216 – 20,994)

Nevada – (13 – 3,429) vs. (7 – 356)

North Dakota – (6 – 385) vs. (90 – 6,268)

Oregon – (15 – 3,469) vs. (229 – 15,666)

South Dakota – ( . . .  – . . . ) vs. (102 – 8,852)

Utah – (463 – 258,282) vs. (14 – 1,305)

Washington – (12 – 1,787) vs. (185 – 18,246)

Wyoming – (29 – 9,501) vs. (35 – 1,841)

Totals – (1,018 – 391,653) vs. (2,606 – 284,640)

Let us take another section.  We will include the eleven Mountain and Pacific Coast States which lie west of the western boundaries of North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Texas.  In these states the census shows that there are 376,777 Mormons and 118,004 Baptists.  Immediately some one says: “The Mormons have more members than the Baptists in that territory because there are so many Mormons in the state of Utah.”  We will therefore deduct from the totals just given the number of Mormons and the number of Baptists who are in Utah.  We will take out Utah and consider simply the ten remaining Mountain and Pacific Coast States, and we find that in that territory there are still more Mormons than Baptists.  The following table gives the exact figures:

Mormon and Baptist Church Membership In That Part of the United States Which Is West Of The Western Boundaries, Of North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Texas, Both With and Without Utah.

Montana – Mormons 2,099 vs. Baptists 4,073

Wyoming – 9,501 vs. 1,841

Colorado – 5,555 vs. 18,548

New Mexico – 1,484 vs. 6,721

Idaho – 73,065 vs. 5,682

Nevada – 3,429 vs. 356

Arizona – 12,624 vs. 2,927

Utah – 258,282 vs. 1,305

Washington – 1,787 vs. 18,246

Oregon – 3,469 vs. 15,666

California – 5,482 vs. 42,639

Totals, including Utah – 376,777 vs. 118,004

Deduct membership in Utah – 258,282 vs. 1,305

Totals, without Utah – 118,495 vs. 116,699

We are inclined to think of the Baptists in the West as comprising a large constituency, and that we are sending missionaries to work among the Mormons, who are comparatively few in number.  The reverse is in fact true, even when we consider so large a territory as that of our Northern Baptist Convention in all of the states west of the Mississippi River.  It should be said, however, that the Mormons count a larger percentage of their constituency in their membership than we Baptists do.

The above figures are not encouraging, but they should be known by our people so that still more earnest efforts may be made to evangelize the Mormons.  We feel that though it cannot be said that large success has followed our efforts in the past, still much good has been done which cannot be shown statistically.  The Mormon people have changed decidedly in regard to certain views, from what they taught even twenty-five years ago.  Possibly the covering of a few of their most ugly doctrines and the presenting of a better front may in fact make that system of religious teaching more dangerous than before.  It is not my intent to discuss such matters here, but simply to give facts relative to the growth of this peculiar sect.

The last religious census shows that during the ten years previous to the time it was taken, there were the following percentages of increase in the United States: Roman Catholics increased 10.6 per cent; the Northern Baptist Convention increased 17.1 per cent; the three large Baptist bodies, namely the Northern Baptist Convention, the Southern Baptist Convention, and the National Baptist Convention (colored), combined, increased 29 per cent.  The Mormons, two bodies, increased 80 per cent.

We may well consider these figures seriously.  Our needs are as follows:

1.  Well-trained young men and women who will consecrate their lives to an intelligent, sympathetic missionary work among the Mormon people just as missionaries commit their entire lives to a foreign field.

2.  The organization of an aggressive, positive work which is definitely constructive and which will set forth clearly and attractively the great principle of our denomination.

3.  A literature, especially adapted to the needs of these people, which does not abuse them but which seeks to give in terms which they can understand the saving truths which they most need.

4.  A cooperative arrangement with other evangelical denominations whereby the whole Mormon question will be studied thoroughly and unselfishly from a real missionary point of view.

5.  A united work that will reach every Mormon community constructively with the true Gospel message.

Now I am really curious.  What are the statistics of Baptists and Mormons in the West today as we approach 2010?

It might get complicated.  I would be interested in the Western statistics of the following groups:  The Reformed Baptists, The Southern Baptists,  The North American Baptists, The General Association of Regular Baptists, The Baptist Bible Fellowship, The Fundamental Baptist Fellowship, and the many other self-proclaimed Independent Baptists, etc.

In humanity, you can be in one place at one time.

In deity, you can be everywhere present.

So who can be both?

Not you. 

Only Jesus.  Please look at this again and anew in John’s Gospel.

It goes against your reason, doesn’t it.  Eliza Snow wrote the words to this hymn:

O My Father, Hymn No. 2921.

O my Father, thou that dwellest In the high and glorious place, When shall I regain thy presence And again behold thy face? In thy holy habitation, Did my spirit once reside? In my first primeval childhood, Was I nurtured near thy side?

2. For a wise and glorious purpose Thou hast placed me here on earth And withheld the recollection Of my former friends and birth; Yet ofttimes a secret something Whispered,”You’re a stranger here,” And I felt that I had wandered From a more exalted sphere.

3. I had learned to call thee Father, Thru thy Spirit from on high, But, until the key of knowledge Was restored, I knew not why. In the heav’ns are parents single? No, the thought makes reason stare! Truth is reason, truth eternal Tells me I’ve a mother there.

4. When I leave this frail existence, When I lay this mortal by, Father, Mother, may I meet you In your royal courts on high? Then, at length, when I’ve completed All you sent me forth to do, With your mutual approbation Let me come and dwell with you.

In July, David publicly praised Heavenly Mother through a historical look at the imagery of the goddess.

But we just can’t roll our eyes in denial or debunk with a higher critical skepticism the last words of Yahweh given via the prophet Jeremiah to the people in Jeremiah 44.

The terror is this.  When the community of God accepts in their hearts the queen, the true reality behind the name of the King is erased.  Right?  Isn’t that the natural consequence stated in the chapter?

It is sad.  All so sad.  I want to sing the mournful dirge of Lamentations right now.

So what about the remnant in exile – those dragged in chains 200 miles up to Riblah and then another 400 miles to Babylon.  In Babylon, they would be greeted and confronted with 180 open shrines to Ishtar.  Hymns and prayers to the goddess sounded everywhere.

But it was there – in the midst of the queen’s populism, her exotic domain – that the sovereign God demonstrated with glory a universal fact (the positive and negative):  Yahweh is the unique Most High; and the Queen is the common sense vanity promoted by creaturely, sinful women.

1.  LDS are discussing the KJV . . .

2.  And evangelicals are setting their sights on a revised NIV . . .

Kate emailed me the link to her article, today.

(1) Monson Calls for Modesty, Tab Collars

(2) Questions about the Nature of God

I couldn’t resist clicking on both.

Lo and behold, I am surfing the internet, and I discover this Baptist pastor on the internet.

And then to top it off friends, I am reading The Standard (July 22, 1899); and I discover within this newspaper article, “The Relation of Sidney Rigdon to the Book of Mormon” by W. A. Stanton, D.D.

Whooaaa!  This guy, Sidney, started his “ministry” as a “Baptist” mess. (more…)