God’s outward call says, “Come, believe, and find rest in Christ!”

God’s inward call brings a subconscious change of heart by the Holy Spirit. God opens the eyes in a person to assuredly receive the word.

This distinction doesn’t solve the mystery, but it further describes it.

God genuinely offers, beckons, beseeches through his word:

“Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.”
– 2 Corinthians 5:20

Yet there is also a kind of “drawing” that always results in coming to the Son:

“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day… This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”
– John 6:44,65

Hence we pray, “Lord, open their eyes!” And we preach, “Behold what God has revealed!”

1. There is one God.
2. Each divine person is God.
   The Father is God.
   The Son is God.
   The Spirit is God.
3. Each divine person is not the other.
   The Father is not the Son.
   The Son is not the Spirit.
   The Spirit is not the Father.
4. Each divine person is distinguished by eternal relations of origin.
   The Father eternally begets the Son.
   The Son is eternally begotten.
   The Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son.
5. How God acts in history corresponds to all the above.

When minor things are used to mask major things.

When words are technically true, but substantially misleading.

When true information is used to give false impressions – by design or cowardice.

The Chalcedonian Definition describes Jesus as homoousios with mankind with respect to his humanity:

“He is of the same essence (homousios) as the Father according to his deity, and the same one is of the same essence (homousios) with us according to his humanity, like us in all things except sin.”

In some sense Mormonism teaches that the Father and Son are homoousios, and that humanity is homoousios with all the exalted gods.

Thus the chasm between Mormonism and Christianity is more about the ousia of deity itself than whether the Father and Son are homoousios. It posits a potentially infinite number of beings and infinite particles of matter that God did not (and even cannot) create. Hence, Mormonism substantially (even if not superficially) rejects the very first line of the Nicene Creed:

“I believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.”

This is more fundamental than its superficial rejection of homoousios. Regarding that term Ron Huggins says,

“Mormons delight in targeting this word homoousios in the creed as making a serious departure from the Bible into the realm of philosophical speculation. I have never read a Mormon writer who notices that homoousios echoes the earlier use of ousia… Or that the introduction of both words can be seen to represent a fairly modest clarification, namely that Jesus was the Son, not the creature of the Father. An idea, by the way, that Mormons agree with.

“Indeed, I sometimes wonder why Mormons, in the midst of attacking the word, have never paused long enough to notice that their own doctrine might be able to apply homoousios in a much more comprehensive way, by using it to describe how all humans are of the same species as God.

“Mormons regularly say that we’re all of the same species as God. Why not simply take homoousios to refer to that in the context of plurality? Were they to do so, it might actually bring more clarity to Christian-Mormon discussion by setting out in sharper relief the difference between the biblical and the Mormon meaning of the term ‘only-begotten’.” (“Those Abominable Creeds”, by Ron Huggins, 25:44)

---

Added December 10, 2025

Caveat to watch out for: Christians affirm that the Father and Son are homoousios in a different manner (as God, per divine simplicity) than creatures can be of the same species.

Remember, I am a computer programmer.

• Speechify. With this I audibly consume PDFs, papers, articles, and Kindle books.
• GitHub Copilot in VS Code. Fancy autocomplete as I code.
• ChatGPT. I am in a constant conversation with the 4o model, and lately, with o1-mini for architectural questions.
• Apple Voice Memos transcription. Say I have a 9am meeting. At 8:30am on my commute I will verbalize my thoughts in preparation. Then, when I arrive at the office, I ask ChatGPT to polish and organize the transcribed thoughts in bullet points or slides.
• SelfControl app for Mac. Does an irreversible block on distracting web sites for a set amount of time. Helpful for getting in the zone.
• Warp terminal. Supports copy and paste and normal text cursor behavior in the command line.
• MacWhisper. I use this to quickly transcribe YouTube videos. Instead of watching a laborious recording, I can quickly peruse a transcript and find interesting parts. Better than YouTube’s native transcription.
• Signal Messenger. Far better than iMessage, Telegram, WhatsApp, etc.
• Bear Notes. My second brain, with near-instant full-text results. I have years of notes. Infinitely better than the now-notorious Evernote.
• Google Photos. Among my favorite software of all time. Frequently showing me historical and recent pictures of family and friends.
• Emporia Vue. Newly acquired. This home energy monitor helps me track energy usage while I work to reduce our electricity bill. In reality, this will probably just motivate me to pay more attention to our Nest programming for AC & furnace.
• Rode Wireless Mic Go II (lapel). MRM/UCRC has a set for recording lectures, debates, and street interviews. They are wonderful.
• Oreck bagged vacuum. Proven and reliable, unlike nearly every other modern fancy vacuum which chokes on small socks.
• Weighted vest + reading glasses. This is a simple way to burn calories while reading and walking.
• Mr. Pen No Bleed Gel Highlighters. Still a favorite for active reading.
• District Tri Crew t-shirts. 8 bucks. I can wear them multiple times before washing in some seasons.
• Keurig coffee machine. Insert pod. Push button. Wake up.
• Stainless steel chainmail scrubber. 9 bucks. Great for my cast iron breakfast pan.

This principle of eternal divine progenitorship in Christianity is found in God having always eternally begotten the Son.

In the late Joseph Smith (cf. Sermon in the Grove) it is in every Son having a Father, and every Father having a Son.

For Joseph Smith, it is found in the infinite regression of generated fathers and sons.

In Christianity, it is in the infinite generation of the eternal Son.

This is why I think that the Book of Mormon’s position on incarnational sonship (the Son became the Son when taking on flash) matters so much. It implicitly rejected eternal sonship and eternal generation, leaving a theological vacuum for eternal progenitorship. It paved the way for Smith to fill in the hole with his future innovation — of infinite regress.

My favorite quote on the image of God, by Herman Bavinck:

“The whole human person is the image of the whole deity.”

More in context:

“‘Image’ tells us that God is the archetype, humanity the ectype; ‘likeness’ adds the notion that the image corresponds in all parts to the original… This does not refer to certain attributes, either on God’s side or ours, such as the intellect or the soul, but rather that the whole human person is the image of the whole deity…”

“God. The whole being, the whole human person and not just “something” in us is the image of God…”
“It is important to insist that the whole person is the image of the whole God, that is, the triune God. The human soul, all the human faculties, the virtues of knowledge, righteousness, and holiness, and even the human body, all of it images God. Thus, a human being does not bear or have the image of God but is the image of God. As human beings we are the likeness or offspring of God (Gen. 1:26; 9:6; Luke 3:38; Acts 17:28; 1 Cor. 11:7; James 3:9). Therefore, God himself, the entire deity, is the archetype of man…”

“The image thus extends to the whole person; nothing is excluded, soul and body, all faculties and powers, in all conditions and relations. It is of course true that in the same way that God’s attributes are more clearly revealed in some creatures than others, so also the image of God comes out more clearly in one part of the human organism than another, more in the soul than in the body, more in the ethical virtues than in the physical powers. This does not alter the truth that the whole person is the image of the triune God…”

“So the whole human being is image and likeness of God, in soul and body, in all human faculties, powers, and gifts. Nothing in humanity is excluded from God’s image; it stretches as far as and constitutes our humanity and humanness. All that is in God—his spiritual essence, his virtues and perfections, his immanent self-distinctions, his self-communication and self-revelation in creation—finds its admittedly finite and limited analogy and likeness in humanity.”

Source: Reformed Dogmatics: Abridged in One Volume

Source: Bergera, Gary James. Line Upon Line: Essays on Mormon Doctrine. Signature Books, 1989. Archived online copy. Google Books link. Kindle link.

• Most Mormons accept the idea that “we came from a premortal existence where our spirits were literally begotten by a heavenly father and a heavenly mother.” (115)
  • “Closely related is the belief that the resurrected faithful of this earth will do what God has been doing: procreate spirit children for future worlds.” (115)
• “The doctrine clearly did not originate in scripture.” (116)
  • No explicit statements in the church’s four standard works (Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price) support the spirit birth doctrine.” (115)
  • Cited to support the idea, Hale concedes that verses like Acts 17:28, Galatians 4:4-7, Romans 8:16, Hebrews 12:9 “do not state that God procreated our spirits, and while a premortal spirit birth may be inferred by the terms ‘Father,’ ‘sons,’ and ‘offspring,’ the more likely intent of these biblical authors is that God is the father of those who accept the gospel and are adopted as his spiritual children.”
    • [Hale miscategorizes at least Acts 17:28, which, though not about premortal spirit birth, neither is it about redemptive sonship. It instead speaks of God as the special creator of humans.]
    • D&C 76:24 “does not refer to the idea of literal procreation by God”, but about “begotten sons and daughters unto God through Jesus Christ.”
• Late Nauvoo theology ∉ early LDS scripture
  • “Most LDS scripture was produced while Mormon theology was in its infancy, and there is little in LDS canon from the theologically productive Nauvoo, Illinois, period of the early to mid-1840s.” (116)
• Despite extensive Mormon literature from this period, none of Joseph Smith’s recorded sermons explicitly teach spirit procreation.
• “Smith’s own doctrinal teaching was that the human spirit as a conscious entity is eternal—as eternal as God.” (p. 116)
• “Smith used the terms ‘spirit,’ ‘soul,’ ‘intelligence,’ and ‘mind’ synonymously to describe the inchoate, indestructible essence of life.” (p. 116)
• Eight documentary sources (from 6 May 1833 to 7 April 1844)
  • D&C 93:29 (1833): “Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.”
  • Willard Richards (c. 1839-1841): “The Spirit of Man is not a created being; it existed from Eternity & will exist to eternity.”
  • Joseph Smith (February 6, 1840): “I believe that the soul is eternal; and had no beginning; it can have no end… . the soul of man, the spirit, had existed from eternity in the bosom of Divinity.”
  • Joseph Smith (January 5, 1841): “If the soul of man had a beginning it will surely have an end… . Spirits are eternal.”
  • Joseph Smith (March 28, 1841): “The spirit or the inteligence of men are self Existant principles before the foundation [of] this Earth.”
  • Book of Abraham 3:18, 22-23 (1842): “If there be two spirits, and one shall be more intelligent than the other, yet these two spirits, notwithstanding one is more intelligent than the other, have no beginning; they existed before, they shall have no end, they shall exist after, for they are gnolaum, or eternal. 22. Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones…”
  • George Laub (1845, summarizing Smith sermon dated April 6, 1843): “How came Spirits? Why, they are and ware Self Existing as all eternity & our Spirits are as Eternal as the very God is himself…”
  • King Follett discourse (April 7, 1844)
• Early formation
  • Lorenzo Snow and Orson Pratt promoted the spirit birth doctrine during Smith’s lifetime.
  • Published in the church’s official organ, Times and Seasons, and through sermons by apostles and Eliza R. Snow.
  • Orson Pratt’s Prophetic Almanac (1845): Introduced a catechism stating that humans are the offspring of God, implying literal spirit begetting.
  • Phelps
  • Eliza R. Snow’s “My Father in Heaven” (1845): References a mother in heaven and spirit birth, indicating these concepts were embraced post-Smith.
• Two main theories:
  • 1. Spirits formed from eternal, unorganized spirit matter through spirit birth.
    • Suggests spirits can have a beginning and potentially cease to exist, which conflicts with Smith’s view of eternal spirits.
  • 2. Individual intelligences are eternal and uncreated; spirit bodies are created through procreation by heavenly parents.
    • Supported by B. H. Roberts and others, though it diverges from Smith’s original teachings.
  • Both theories attempt to align Smith’s eternal spirit doctrine with the later spirit birth belief.
• Brigham Young
  • Taught that God and exalted beings are literal progenitors of both physical and spirit children.
    • First physical bodies on each world are begotten by the world’s god.
  • Reinforced the spirit birth doctrine, aligning it with the belief in eternal progression and exaltation.
• B. H. Roberts posited that the intelligences are eternal and uncreated, and that spirit bodies are procreated by divine beings
  • John A. Widtsoe adopted Roberts’ view, affirming the eternal nature of intelligence and supporting the idea of procreated spirit bodies
  • James E. Talmage
  • Joseph Fielding Smith
• The spirit birth doctrine is widely taught by Mormon leaders but contradicts Joseph Smith’s recorded teachings.
  • According to Hale, it likely emerged from early followers’ interpretations or unrecorded teachings rather than directly from Smith.

See also

• D&C 76:24 isn’t about “literal” spirit children (MRM article)