‼️THE GOD MAKERS: Fact or Fiction❓ We Have the Receipts ‼️

In this episode today of Esoteric Atlanta, the podcast, we're going to take a closer look at the controversial 1982 documentary, The God Makers, and more importantly, the sources behind the claims it presents about Mormonism. If you've never seen the God makers, this documentary made waves by presenting Mormon beliefs, theology, temple practices, the concept of exaltation, the premortal world, heavenly parents, collob, and other teachings through the lens of an evangelical Christian critique. But where did the filmmakers actually get their information? Were these claims invented for the documentary? Were they taken from Mormon scripture? Were they based on statements from Mormon prophets and apostles? And how much of what appears in the God makers can actually be traced back to published Mormon sources? That's what we are going to investigate. This episode follows the receipts tracing back claims to the books, scriptures, historical documents, statements by Mormon leaders, and other sources that were available to the filmmakers. Every major claim discussed in this episode, source information, and references are provided in the description box so you can follow the research for yourself. The goal is not simply to tell you what to believe. Follow the sources, read the document, look at the quotation, check the context, and decide for yourself. This is a long- form episode, so chapters are also provided in the description box to make it easier to navigate directly to the topics you're interested in. Whether you agree with the God makers, disagree with it, or have never heard of it before, this episode is about going back to the original material and asking one simple question. Where did they get that? And then we follow the receipts. Hello everybody and welcome back to Esoteric Atlanta the podcast. Before we get into today's episode, I want to explain exactly why we're doing this particular investigation. This episode is a response. Recently, Loren and I referenced the documentary The God Makers in one of our previous videos. After that video, we received quite a bit of criticism from members of the Mormon community. Some people disagreed with our conclusions. That's completely fine. You're allowed to disagree with us. But some of the responses crossed the line from disagreement into name calling and personal attacks. And that is precisely why I decided that instead of simply arguing back, we're going to do something much more useful. We're going to show you the receipts. We're going to go back to the actual books. We're going to look at the citations. We're going to look at what the filmmakers said. We're going to look at what their sources actually said. And then we're going to let you decide. So before we begin, I want to say something very clearly. Content warning. The God Makers is an extremely controversial film. It contains material involving religion, religious rituals, spiritual warfare, Satan, race, and descriptions of Mormon temple ceremonies. Some of the imagery is intentionally disturbing and provocative. So, if you know that material like this is going to be triggering, upsetting, or disturbing for you, please skip this video. We're not making this episode to force anyone to watch something they don't want to watch. We're making it because we want to investigate the historical claims surrounding it. But before we get into the episode today, guys, you know what to do. Please hit that subscribe button and give us a like. Also, if you want, please leave us a comment down in the comment section. That absolutely helps our videos go out into the algorithms. If you don't know what to comment, just put your country flag. It's always super cool to see where you guys are viewing from. You can also help us out by hitting the hype button on this video. A big special thank you to all of our Patreons, to our producers, to our Substack donors, and to our YouTube members. If you would like to help support the work we do here on Esoteric Atlanta, all those options and links are down in the description box below. Just let me know. Let me show you. I love you. Welcome back to Esoteric Atlanta, the podcast. If you're new here, my name is Bryce and I was never a Mormon. I grew up Presbyterian, but as an adult, I have stopped identifying with any particular religion. There are certainly things that as a never Mormon, I will never fully understand. I didn't grow up inside the Mormon culture. I didn't experience the church as a member and I don't have the personal history that current or former members bring to these conversations. But there is also an advantage to being an outsider because I don't have an emotional attachment to Mormonism. I can sometimes see patterns that someone who is currently inside the church or even someone who has currently left it might not be able to see clearly. I want to be clear about something. I'm not approaching this from the perspective of trying to defend one religion over another. I don't claim a religious label. My interest is simpler and also much bigger. I want to understand the truth about God and our relationship with God as much as humanly possible outside of the belief systems that human beings have constructed around that relationship. That does not mean that I believe I have all the answers. Quite the opposite, it means I'm willing to question everything, including the beliefs I was raised with, the beliefs I've studied, and the beliefs that are presented to us as unquestionable truth. And that is the perspective I'm bringing to this conversation about Mormonism and the documentary The God Makers. Now, let's get back into it. So what is it that we are actually investigating in this episode? Well, let's start with this. There's an accusation that has followed the God makers for decades. The accusation is essentially this that filmmakers made all of this up. The bizarre cosmology, the gods, the premortal existence, heavenly mother, the idea that humans can also become gods, the planet collab, the temple rituals, the relationship between Jesus and Lucifer, the strange cosmological claims, all of it, according to some Mormons, was invented or distorted by anti- Mormon evangelical filmmakers. Now, I want to be very clear. The God Makers absolutely was a polarizing production. It was not a neutral academic documentary. Ed Decker was a former Mormon who became an evangelical Christian and an outspoken critic of the LDS church. The film was deliberately provocative. It used animation, dramatic narration, reenactments, and highly charged landscape. And yes, there are claims in the film that Mormons have challenged. There are quotations whose context Mormons have disputed. And there are historical teachings that many Mormons are not aware have been changed. We're going to talk about all of that. But there is also another claim that deserves equally the same level of scrutiny. That the theology presented in the God makers was simply fabricated. Because when you actually start to look at the sources, that becomes much harder to sustain. And one of those sources is a book called Mormon Doctrine by Bruce R. McConi. And this is where today's investigation begins. But why does this matter? Because if someone tells you the filmmakers invented this doctrine, there is a very simple way to test that claim. Find the doctrine. Find the source. Find the page. read the page and then ask, "Is this actually what the source says?" That is what we're going to do. We're not going to say, "Do you like Mormonism?" or "Do you hate Mormonism?" We're not going to say or ask, "Are you a Mormon?" And we're not going to say or ask, "Are you a Christian?" Those questions are not relevant to whether a quotation exists or not. We're doing historical source criticism. And that brings us to something else we need to understand before we start because there is a fundamental difference in the way authority works within Mormonism compared with many forms of historic Christianity. One of the most important things to understand about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is its doctrine of continuing revelation. Mormons do not believe revelation from God ended with the biblical period. They believe God continues to communicate with his church. And they believe that the president of the church serves as a living prophet who can receive revelation and guidance for the church and its people. That's a fundamentally important feature of Mormon theology. It goes God to living prophet to the church. In Mormon theology, the prophet becomes what we would call an intermediary between man and God, just like the pope is for the Catholic Church, which fundamentally goes against the teachings of Jesus. But that's a topic for another day. My point in explaining this is that I want you to understand that the way Mormons view authority and teaching is very different from the way mainstream Christianity views it. This basically means Mormonism isn't structured around the idea that all theological questions were permanently settled in the first century. The church believes that God can continue to reveal his will and that has enormous consequences for the development of Mormon theology. Because if revelation is ongoing, then the theological system can change and be redeveloped. A teaching can be emphasized, then a teaching can be deemphasized, a previous explanation can be abandoned, a practice can be changed, a doctrine can be clarified, and sometimes a previous interpretation can be explicitly rejected. This is one reason that I use the phrase floating theology. Now, I want to be clear. Floating theology is my descriptive term for the way Mormons practice their faith. But that is not an official Mormon theological category. It is my own. I'm using it to describe a system in which doctrinal interpretation has a continuing living authority structure rather than being frozen at one historical moment. Basically, the theology floats from one prophet to the next, changing with each prophet because the Mormons believe the prophet speaks to God directly. Floating theology is a way to create mass manipulation. And this is where the distinction between Mormonism and other Christian traditions become really, really important. Now, in talking about this floating theology in comparison to mainstream Christianity, I'm trying to make it easier for the audience to understand what is actually happening with the God makers. But in doing that, in talking about how Mormonism can potentially change its theology from one prophet to the next, kind of like the game Simon says. You might be asking, "But isn't all Christianity always changing?" And that answer is also yes. And this is where we need to be fair. You see, Christianity is not one single institution. Catholicism has a particular authority structure. Eastern Orthodoxy has another. Anglicanism has yet another. Protestant traditions vary enormously. Pentecostalism and evangelicalism can have continuing prophetic or charismatic movements. So I'm not saying every other Christian believes nothing can ever change because that is not true. Christian theology has developed for 2,000 years. But the question is and this is where it's important the distinction is important here. Where does final or normative authority come from? And that is where Mormonism is distinctive. Historic Catholic and Orthodox Christianity, for example, ground doctrine in combination of scripture, tradition, council, creeds, and established ecclesiastical authority. Many Protestant traditions, including the one that I grew up with, put a particularly strong emphasis solely on the scripture as the final normative authority. Mormonism, by contrast, explicitly embraces continuing revelation through a living prophet and apostles. And Mormonism has additional canonical scriptures beyond the Bible. They also have, of course, the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. And even those scriptures exist within a theological system that permits additional revelation. So the structure is very very different. Let's review quickly. Many Protestant traditions believe that the scripture alone equals theological interpretation. Catholic and Orthodox traditions believe that scripture plus tradition plus ecclesiastical authority equal interpretation. The LDS system believes that scripture plus restoration revelation and a living prophet's authority with God equal interpretation. Again, these are very broad simplifications, but they help us to understand the central difference. Now, there is another difference that I want to review quickly just to help you guys possibly understand what I'm talking about when I mean a floating theology. And this is just as much for the Mormons and ex Mormons as it is for the Christians in the Bible. Now, now before I get into this, we are going to do an episode where we compare the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament versus the teachings of Jesus in the Book of Mormon and showing all the differences because realistically, Mormon Jesus is not the same as the biblical Jesus. But that's going to be for a different episode. But I do want to point something out. In the Bible, it states in Revelation 22 18-19, "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. 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. So in the Bible explicitly it says not to add to the scripture nor to take away from the scripture. So this is where the floating theology of Mormonism collides head-to-head with mainstream Christianity. And this is explicitly why many mainstream Christians consider Mormonism to be a very blasphemous and heretical faith because they have added three extra books to the scriptures. This also comes down to the idea of the covenant. In the New Testament, and again, we're going to go deeper into this in a separate video, but I'm just using this as an example. In the New Testament, it is written that Jesus fulfilled the covenant. He was the Messiah. His blood alone paid for the sins of man. This means that all of the rituals that were done in the Old Testament, the sacrifices, the polygamy, Mormons, the polygamy, everything that was done in temple services in the Old Testament are now null and void because Jesus fulfilled the covenant. That temple services are not are null and void. No more rituals, no more blood atonement. Jesus fulfilled the covenant. It is done. He has risen. That's what the mainstream Christianity believes. They believe there is nothing else that you can do to get your salvation. To believe that you have to do works to get into heaven is blasphemous according to mainstream Christianity because in their belief system only through Christ do you go to heaven and there's not three levels of heaven. There's nothing you can do. And so mainstream Christianities believes that this idea of works getting you into heaven is is putting you in a on a higher pedestal than Jesus. And to mainstream Christians, that's blasphemous. So these ideas coming that are strictly Mormon ideas that are not found in the Bible is going back to that verse in Revelation where it's warning you that if there is additional information added to the Bible that this is a false prophet. And not only do we have the Book of Mormon being the original and then the Pearl of Great Price and the Doctrine and Covenants, but we also have things like visions of glory. This is all told to you in the Bible, which Mormons you claim. You claim Mormons to believe in the Bible, but you can't believe in the Bible and believe in the Book of Mormon because they're two totally opposite belief systems. So, this is something you really need to think about. I know cognitive dissonance is really really real. But because Joseph smart starting with Joseph Smith changed the theology of the normalized doctrinal main belief of Christian faith. We now have created a floating theology where any Tom, Dick, or Harry that gets appointed to be the top of the church now can change everything Mormons believe. That's not stabilizing and that's not legitimate according to the Christian path. So, if you have any more questions about that, please ask in the comment section below. Again, we are going to do a video going over everything in the New Testament that collides headirst with the beliefs of Mormonism. So, why am I talking about this? Why do what does any of this have to do with the God makers? Because when we start reading old Mormon books, we are going to encounter statements that modern Mormons may look at and say, "That's not what we believe." And sometimes they're right because what you believe has changed. That's different from mainstream Christianity. What mainstream Christianity believes has always been the same thing. That Jesus is the only way to heaven. That's it. But just because your belief system has been changed because you know the prophet has claimed God has changed his mind that doesn't necessarily mean the historical quotation is fake. It only means again that the theology changed. For example, a Mormon leader in 1950 might explain something one way. Another leader in 1975 might explain it differently. A revelation may occur. A policy may change. A later prophet may stop emphasizing an earlier teaching. Or the church may officially reject an interpretation that earlier leaders promoted. That does not however erase the historical record. It means the historical record has layers. And this is precisely why The God Makers became such an interesting case study because the filmmakers were looking backwards. Rightfully so. They were digging into older Mormon books to try to find the truth of what Joseph Smith was actually teaching. Older sermons, older teachings, older LDS publications. And then they were presenting some of those older, more foundational teachings to an evangelical audience in 1982. Meanwhile, modern Mormons may be looking backwards from 2026 and saying, "This isn't how we understand our religion anymore." Both things are potentially true. This is why I want to change the way we phrase these discussions. Whenever you hear Mormonism teaches, you have to ask when did it teach that? Did Joseph Smith teach it? Did Brigham Young teach it? Did John Taylor teach it? Did Joseph F. Smith teach it? Did Joseph Smith teach it? Did Bruce R. McConi teach it? Was it Mormon scripture? Was it an official church publication? Was it a personal theological interpretation? Was it later rejected? Is it still taught today? That one question that is so important is when. Cuz that question of when can completely change the conversation. And that brings us to the man whose book we're going to be examining. Bruce R. McConi. Mcconi was an extremely influential LDS theologian and later became an apostle to the church. In 1958 he published Mormon doctrine a revised second edition appeared in 1966 and this book became enormously influential theological reference work. McConi was an important church authority. Some of his statements were later modified, some were rejected, some reflected the prevailing theological explanations of his error. Some continue to resemble current LDS teachings. So we are going to treat Mormon doctrine as a valid historical Mormon theological source because again Mormon theology is a floating theology. Did Ed Decker and Dave Hunt, the men who created the God Makers, actually use Mormon doctrine? Yes, they did. The published book version of the God Makers contains extensive notes and references. And among these sources again and again is Bruce R. Mcconkey's Mormon doctrine. These citations include numerous pages across the book. For example, page 92 through 93, 155- 156, 210 through 211, 251, 338, 415 to 416, 527, 650, 654 to 655, 669, and others. So, let's just stop right there for a second because this is only the first receipt. We're not saying I heard they used Makoni. We're not saying someone on YouTube told me. We're not saying an anti- Mormon website claims it. What we're saying is that in the author's own published work, they cite McConi repeatedly. So therefore, did the God makers use Mormon doctrine? Yes, that's documented. Now, the interesting question is, what did they take from it? Now, let's go deeper into the investigation. Here are the rules of this investigation. From this point forward, we are going to follow four rules. Rule one, if the God makers make a claim, we're going to identify it. Rule two, if the filmmakers cite a source, we're going to find that source. Rule three, if the source is Makoni, we're going to read McConkey's actual words. Rule four. If McConi got the idea from an earlier Mormon source, we're going to go there, too. Because I don't want to stop at Makoni said it. I want to know where did Makoni get it. And that's where this investigation becomes way more interesting and way more fun. All right, let's look at something kind of like a tree. We're going to call this the source tree. We've got the God Makers, which is the 1982 film. That takes us to Decker and Hunt in their book, which also takes us to Bruce McConi who wrote the Mormon doctrine, which then takes us to Joseph Fielding Smith, which then takes us back to Brigham Young, which then takes us back to Joseph Smith, which takes us back to the LDS scripture, which include the Book of Abraham, Doctrine and Covenants, the Book of Moses, the Book of Mormon, and sometimes there is another branch which is called the original LDSource. And that branches off to anti- Mormon researchers, which goes back to Decker and Hunt. If you look at all these layers, all these limbs of this tree, we're potentially dealing with several layers of transmission. And every time information passes through another layer, there's an opportunity for it to be a fluid theology, for it to be altered a little bit or changed a little bit because Mormon doctrine allows for that. This also allows for context to disappear, for language to change, for emphasis to shift, or for someone to exaggerate. So, our goal is to get as close to the original source as possible. I want to make one more thing clear before we continue. If you are a Mormon and you disagree with the God makers, that's okay. If you're a Mormon and you think the documentary misrepresents your faith, we're going to give you some time to say your peace. If you're a Christian and you think, like so many Christians do, that Mormonism is theologically incompatible with historic Christianity, that's okay, too. We're not going to turn this into Mormons are stupid. Mormons are evil. Christians are stupid. Christians are evil. That's not what this is. People deserve to be treated as people. Do not forget, listen, in doing historical dives and engaging in debate, do not forget the other person's humanity. Especially since all of us have been subjected to brainwashing. People deserve to be treated as people. Institutions and doctrine can be investigated critically without attacking every individual who belongs to them. And if someone wants to challenge our conclusion, great. You need to bring documents, bring sources, bring context. If we get something wrong, we will correct it. But you have to bring the receipts, not just your feelings. One thing that isn't evidence is name calling. Name calling is not evidence. Feelings are not evidence. Evidence is evidence. A source is evidence. A document is evidence. A quotation is evidence. A page number is evidence. And that is what we're interested in. We're not interested in your feelings. So, if doing a deep dive into the truth behind the God makers is going to trigger you or hurt your feelings, then now is your last opportunity to turn this video off. We're not going to rewrite history just because your feelings are hurt. That's not how it works here on this channel. Now, with that foundation established, we can finally get to the famous animated sequence. And this is where things get so fascinating because we're going to hear a claim from the God makers. And then we're going to put the source directly underneath it. We're going to be looking at premortal existence. Heavenly Father, Heavenly Mother, Spirit Children, Lucifer, Jesus, Collab, Godhood, Exaltation, Temple ordinance, and eventually the relationship between Mormonism and Freemasonry. And every time we encounter a claim, we're going to ask this. Did Mormonism actually teach this? When did it teach it? Where is it written? Who said it? Is it scripture? Is it a prophet's teaching? Is it Makoni? Is it current? Because those distinctions matter. And if we're going to criticize the Godmakers, we should criticize it accurately. And if we're going to defend the documentaries use of Mormon sources, we should defend only what the sources actually establish. No more no less. So, this is where we're going here because we're not asking you to believe us. We're asking you to read the receipts. But before we settle into this today, guys, let's take a brief word from our sponsor. If you've been looking for a workout that helps you move, strengthen, tone, and ground your body while reconnecting with your energy, we have a brand new practice for you at Fusion Body Studio. Introducing our 40inut fusion, flow, and tone. An all levels workout that brings together movement, breath, strength, and the energetic body. We're going to begin standing with sun salutations, using breath and flowing movement to warm up the body. awaken the muscles and start to wake up the flow of the chakras. As we move, we'll bring awareness into different areas of the body and use movement and breath to cultivate energy and connection. This is more than simply going through the motions. We're learning to become more present in the physical body while awakening our subtle energy. Then we'll take our practice down to the floor. The second half focuses on grounding and toning, helping you strengthen the core, legs, hips, and stabilizing muscles that support you from the inside out. You'll only need a few simple things for this workout. A wall, a chair, and optionally a small exercise ball. That's it. And because this is an all levels practice, you can make it work for your body. Take modifications when you need them. Challenge yourself when you're ready. And remember that your practice is your own. At Fusion Body Studio, we believe movement is the foundation of spirituality. The physical body gives us a place to experience breath, awareness, energy, and transformation. So, as you flow, tone, strengthen, and ground, we'll also use the practice to awaken the chakras and bring greater awareness into the body. And if you're new to Fusion Body Studio, this is the perfect time for you to join. Use code Bryce 20 B R I CE 20 all caps when you sign up and you'll receive 20% off your first 6 months. Plus, you'll get 7 days completely free to try Fusion Body Studio. So, you can explore the studio, discover our different classes, and find the practice that works best for your body and your spiritual journey. This is your invitation to step away from the noise. Get out of your head and come back into your body. Grab your mat, your chair, your wall, and your optional ball and join me for our brand new 40 minutes fusion flow and tone. Flow with your body, wake up your energy, find your ground. Go to Fusion Body Studio, use Bryce 20 at checkout, and start your 7-day free trial today. I'll see you on the mat. Before we heard from our sponsorship, we established the reason that we're doing this investigation. Loren and I referenced the God makers in a previous episode. Some members of the Mormon community strongly objected, and that's fine. People are entitled to disagree. But rather than simply trading insults, we decided to do something much more useful. We are putting out the receipts because one of the central criticisms of the Godmakers is that it fabricated Mormon theology. So, we are going to test that claim. We're going to take the most controversial claims made in the documentary and we're going to follow them backwards from the documentary to the book to the Mormon source and when possible all the way back to the earliest source we can find. Today we're starting with the famous animated sequence. But before we do that, there's one more thing we absolutely need to review and understand. And that is the problem with the word doctrine when it comes to the Mormon faith. When we're dealing with Mormon history, one of the biggest problems is the word doctrine. Because Mormonism has a distinctive concept of continuing revelation and continuing manipulation. The LDS church teaches that revelation did not stop with Joseph Smith. It continues, "The church describes modern prophets and apostles as authorized to receive revelations and guidance for the church and its people." And this is not something that critics invented. The LDS church itself teaches this concept. For example, LDS teaching material describes modern prophets and apostles as receiving continuing revelation to guide the church. This is found in doctrine and covenants 21. It's important to know this because this is where it instructs the church to give heed to the words of the prophet as he receives them. And the LDS church itself describes continuing revelation as an essential part of its system. Now I want to be very precise here. I'm going to use a phrase throughout this series. Again, this phrase is floating theology. This is my description, not an official LDS term. What I mean is that Mormon theology has a living revelatory authority structure. The LDS church doesn't teach that God stops revealing information after the first century. It teaches that God continues to reveal his will to the prophet and head of the church. That means that Mormon theology can develop over time. And we have an enormous historical example of exactly that. Joseph Smith teaches something. Brigham Young develops or emphasizes something. Another prophet later clarifies it. Another leader deemphasizes it. A practice changes. A previous explanation is rejected. And sometimes an earlier statement is simply no longer emphasized. Like how in 1978, God changed his mind about black people according to the Mormons. And this fact matters. enormously when we're investigating The God Makers because The God Makers was produced in 1982. We're investigating it today in 2026. That's a 44-year difference. And Mormonism itself has changed during that period because, you know, again, God changes his mind according to Mormons. Now, before somebody says, "Wait a minute, you're saying that the Mormon prophet can change whatever he wants." The answer is yes. However, Mormons don't see it that way. The LDS church tries to distinguish continuing revelation from the idea that the prophet is receiving non-stop revelation about everything. And they do this by not presenting every statement by the church leader as a revelation. But even though they try to use this as a loophole, it's still pretty obvious if you study patterns that most of Mormonism has just simply been made up by the person who is in charge. And again, that's a very distinct difference between Mormonism and mainstream Christianity. In mainstream Christianity, it's not that mainstream Christians believe God stopped giving revelation. It's that mainstream Christians believe Jesus died for their sins. Therefore, they don't have to take orders from a quote unquote prophet or leader. They can talk to God directly. That's the big difference. Okay? So when Mormons claim apostles and prophets, they're going back to Old Testament teachings and completely ignoring what the New Testament says. So that's the difference, okay? It's not that mainstream Christianity doesn't hear from God. It's just that mainstream Christianity teaches that God speaks to people directly and not to the head of a church. We're done with prophets. We're done with prophets and apostles. We're done with intermediaries. That's why the Protestant Reformation happened is because having an intermediary like a pope or a prophet of a church is in direct contrast as to what Jesus spoke about. So I hope that makes sense. All right. So y'all let's talk about Bruce R. McConi cuz we can't go into the God makers without speaking about this guy. Now again for my non- Mormons, my never Mormons, you probably don't have any idea who Bruce Rakoni is. just like non- Mormons have no freaking clue who Moroni is because he's not an angel talked about in the actual Bible. But nonetheless, let's get into this character. Bruce R. Makanki. So, who is he? He is actually one of the most important names in this investigation. Makanki was an LDS general authority and later became a member of the quorum of the twel apostles. for my non- Mormons, my never Mormons, that means he was a pretty big deal. Like he was kind of a big deal. Okay, so as I said, in Mormonism, it is taught that the prophet speaks directly to God. So therefore, in layman's terms, the prophet can make up whenever he wants to. And he's got 12 apostles around him. Okay, these 12 apostles are also a part of that process. So Makoni was one of these dudes, one of these 12 apostles. Interestingly enough, 12 + 1 equals 13. This is exactly how covens work. 12 witches and one warlock. So that's just neither here nor there, but just something interesting that I would point out to you guys. So Bruce Arm Makoni when he was alive was one of the main dudes in the 12 quorum of the apostles hanging out with the head prophet who Mormons believe has direct communication with God. So this guy's a big deal again. He's a really big deal. And in 1958 he published something called Mormon doctrine. The second edition appeared in 1966. And hear me when I say this, my friends. This book became one of the most influential 20th century attempts to organize Mormon theology in a single reference work. And here's our first receipt. Tada. The authors of the God makers cite Makoni not once, not twice, repeatedly. So when somebody says the God makers simply made up this theology, our response is well, let's look at their sources. Receipt number one, premortal existence. The first major component of the cartoon is the idea that human beings existed before they were born. Now, does Mormonism actually teach that? Yes. This is one of the easiest claims to verify. The LDS church currently teaches that before earthly birth, human beings lived with God as his spirit children. Current gospel topics material explicitly describes premortal life as an existence before birth in which people lived as spirit children of God. It also identifies a premortal council and it teaches that Jesus Christ was present in that premortal existence. It also teaches that Lucifer was there as well. So here's the first interesting thing. Some of the material in the God makers that sound like the most bizarre to traditional Christian is actually still recognizably present in contemporary LDS teaching. We lived with God before we were born. The LDS church, the LDS church's own material says that human beings lived with God before birth as spirit children. It also says that a premortal council occurred and that Jesus It also says that a premortal council occurred and that Jesus and Lucifer were involved in the premortal drama. So, receipt number one, the basic concept is not an invention of the God makers. Receipt number two, spirit children. Now, let's go one step deeper. The LDS church doesn't merely say you existed before birth. It says you existed as a spirit child of God. And that language is extremely important. The LDS church's current material describes people as spirit sons and daughters of heavenly parents. So when the God makers describe a premortal family structure, we can't simply dismiss the entire thing as fabrication. the underlying concepts exist. Receipt number three, heavenly parents. Now we reach one of the strongest receipts in this entire investigation. The LDS church currently teaches heavenly father and heavenly mother. This is not an accusation made by an evangelical filmmaker. It's on the LDS church's own website. The church gospel topics essays titled Mother in Heaven states that Latter-day Saints believe human beings are spirit children of heavenly parents, a heavenly father and a heavenly mother. The church calls the doctrine of a mother in heaven a cherished and distinctive belief. So if someone tells you the God makers invented heavenly mother, that is simply not accurate. But now let's go backwards because the LDS church's own historical essays tells us something fascinating. It says there is no record of a formal revelation to Joseph Smith specifically establishing this doctrine. However, the earliest published references appeared shortly after Joseph Smith's death in 1844 and the historical record contains earlier Mormon statements about heavenly parents. The 1909 first presidency taught that men and women are literally the sons and daughters of a deity and referred to as a universal father and mother. The 1995 family a proclamation to the world later described every person as the spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents. Look at this chain. Early LDS teachings 1909 first presidency makoni the godmakers current LDS teachings. So obviously this was not something invented in 1982. Receipt number four and heavenly mother. Now we bring in the book we promised to investigate Mormon doctrine. Guess what McConi discusses? Mother in heaven. And this is exactly the sort of passage that the God makers was drawing upon. The revelent material appears in the second edition in the section concerning the mother in heaven pages 516 through 517. Makoni connects the doctrine to earlier LDS teachings about heavenly parentage. So our chain is no longer theoretical. We can put it here. the Godmakers, Bruce R. McConi, Mormon doctrine, Heavenly Mother, and now here's the crucial distinction. McConi is not the origin of the concept. He's a later transmitter and synthesizer. The doctrine existed before him. That's actually more interesting because it means Decker and Hunt weren't simply pulling a weird sentence out of a once obscure 20th century book. They were drawing from much older theological tradition. Receipt number five, God has a body. Now the cartoon depicts God in physical form. Is that Mormon? Yes. And this has an extremely direct scriptural receipt. Doctrine in Covenants 130:22 teaches that the father has a body of flesh and bone as tangible as man's. That's not anti- Mormon literature, my friends. That is actual LDS scripture. So, the claim is that God has a body. The source is doctrine and covenant 13022. The verdict canonical LDS teaching. This is one of the places where the Godmakers doesn't need makoni. The filmmakers can go directly to Mormon scripture. Receipt number six. God was once man. Now we get controversial. The cartoon presents the idea that God was once like man. Where did that come from? Again, not from Decker, not from Hunt, not from Manki originally. It came from Joseph Smith. The King Flet discourse of 1844 is one of the foundational sources. Joseph Smith taught his followers that God had once been in a condition resembling humanity. This later became associated with the famous Mormon couplet, as man is now, God once was. As God is now, man may be. And this is one of the central ideas behind the title, the God makers. But notice what we're doing. We're not saying everything in the cartoon came from Mormon doctrine. We're saying the filmmakers constructed the cartoon from a network of Mormon sources and McConi is one of those sources and that's a much more defensible claim. Receipt number seven, becoming like God. Instead of asking, did God once live as man? Let's ask can man become like God. This is the doctrine of exaltation and the LDS church still teaches it. The current gospel topics material describes the divine potential of human beings and connects exaltation with becoming like quote unquote heavenly father. So once again this isn't simply an anti-ormon invention. The vocabulary may have changed, the emphasis may have changed, but the underlying concept remains part of LDS theology and McConi discusses it extensively. This is why Mormon doctrine citation matters. The book helped provide Decker and Hunt with a 20th century theological source through which they could present these concepts to their audience. Receipt number eight, Jesus and Lucifer. Now we get to one of the most controversial lines and one that is going to, I know, make a lot of mainstream Christians furious. The filmmakers emphasize the relationship between Jesus and Lucifer. That Jesus and Satan are brothers. Let's slow this down. The current LDS church own explanation of premortality states that Jesus was the firstborn son of the father and the spirit and that Lucifer was another spirit son of God. So within the LDS cosmological family structure, Jesus is the firstborn. Lucifer is another spirit son. Both existed premortally. Lucifer rebelled. Jesus became the savior. This gives the brother's terminology its theological basis. Now let's give a qualification here. The LDS church does not teach that Jesus and Satan are equal. Jesus has a unique status. He is the savior. He is the firstborn. He is the central plan of salvation. Lucifer is the rebel. So are Jesus and Lucifer within the same premortal family? Yes. That is within LDS cosmology. Do they have equal status? No. And I know that that I can I can hear the Christians right now cursing at this screen. I know that pisses Christians off because it's very different. We're taught that Jesus is God in flesh and that Lucifer is a fallen angel. They're not they're not brothers. They're not from the same source, right? So, um but we'll get that into we'll get deep into that when we get into our video comparing and contrasting theological beliefs of Mormons versus mainstream Christianity. I just want to put that out there and say I know that that's really hurting a lot of Christians to hear that and it's probably shocking a lot of Christians to hear that. That that's what the Mormons believe. It shocked me when I learned that and I don't consider myself to be Christian. So, I get it. And I'm sure it's pretty shocking to a lot of of Mormons to hear that Christians would absolutely find that to be satanic and heretical and blasphemous to say that Jesus and Lucifer were like brothers. Because in the Bible specifically, it claims that he's a fallen angel, not a brother of Jesus, and that Jesus and God are the same. So, it gets into very different belief systems here. That's why a lot of times people say Mormon Jesus and Christian Jesus are not the same thing. And I I I agree. I absolutely agree. They're not the same thing. So now let's get to receipt number nine. The council in heaven. The cartoon presents a premortal council. Again, the LDS church currently teaches exactly this basic concept. The official gospel topics explanation states that in premortal existence, God's spirit children attended a council at which Heavenly Father presented his plan. So once again, this is documented and it gets even more interesting because the current LDS explanation explicitly says Jesus Christ was the premortal firstborn son. Lucifer was another spirit son. Lucifer rebelled against the plan. Those who followed God in Christ came to earth. Those who followed Lucifer were cast out and denied mortal embodiment. So let's think this through. This means the broad narrative that the cartoon dramatized is not foreign to LDS theology. It is LDS theology. The difference is that the filmmakers presented it through an intentionally sensational lens. And this is something that I asked Lorine and I don't know if I made myself clear. Maybe I'm maybe this is because I'm an outsider looking in. So this is a question I have to the Mormons and this is what I would ask a missionary if he came to my house. So you've got this premortal council that are all their own gods, right? They have their own little planets. They're all their own gods. They all have their own spirit children and they're creating these other planets with spirit children. So you have all these gods out there floating around their own planet. Who's their god? Who do they worship? What's the next step? Come on, Mormons, let me know what's the next step. Who do they actually worship? This is where it gets complicated, Mormons. Because no other religion teaches that God was man or God was once a man. G God came to earth as Jesus according to the Christians, but God was never a man. That that blew my ever loving mind when I found out that Mormons actually believe that God was once a man and has a body. Like that blew my mind. I've never heard any Christian denomination believe that. That's scary to me. That like scares the out of me. Why would I ever want to trust a being that has the mental nervous system and mental capacities of a human? I don't trust humans. So why would I trust God if God was a God's not a human. God's a consciousness. So anyway, that's one area where I absolutely concur with the Christian mainstream Christian church. God was never a human being. Absolutely not. That's ridiculous. So anyway, and my question is if there are if God is a human being and has a flesh body and there's all these other gods floating around up there in the sky, sky daddies out there with their own little planets and all these sky daddies are having these meetings in the premortal with their sky children. Who do they worship? What's the next step? Who's sky daddy's sky daddy? Right? Does that make sense? Makes sense in my mind. I'm clocking it in my mind. There's a problem here. There's a huge problem here. There's a huge problem here with this theology. So anyway, here we go. Receipt number 10, morality and the body. Now, the cartoon presents earthly existence as part of a progression. Again, the LDS church teaches that, too. Premortal existence, mortal existence, life after death, resurrection, progression toward eternal life. The LDS plan of salvation is explicitly structured around these stages. So once again, we have a premortal life, a mortal life, and a life after death. This is not something Ed Decker invented. It is within the LDS theological framework. Receipt number 11, collab. Now, that word makes almost everyone stop and say, "Wait, what?" Collab. Here's the receipt. Collab is in the book of Abraham. It is not an anti-ormon book. Not in the God makers, not in Bruce Mcconi, but in Mormon scripture itself. All right. Pearl of great price. Book of Abraham chapter 3. The Book of Abraham describes collab within the cosmological framework. Therefore, did the God makers invent collab? No. Is collab part of LDS scriptures? Yes. But here's the important distinction. The filmmakers took scriptural cosmology and they visualized it. They created a much more concrete picture of God's cosmic location. The visual representation is an interpretation. But again, the existence of collab in the book of Abraham is not. So, so far, my friends, we're at Receipt 12. And so far, there has been absolutely nothing inaccurate that the God makers have said. It is all backed by Mormon scripture. Receipt number 12, the earth as part of creation. The filmmakers also discuss spiritual creation and Mormon scripture provides a source for that. The Book of Moses describes spiritual creation before the natural creation. McConi also discusses that distinction and this is one of the places where Decker and Hunt site Makonkey's Mormon doctrine in their source apparatus. The relevant Makoni material includes pages 210 through 211 and 251 in the addition being cited. Again, again, again, the documentary didn't invent the underlying theology. This is the God maker so far is batten 100, you guys. There's nothing they've said that is not found in actual Mormon doctrine. Receipt number 13, temple ordinances and exaltation. Now we leave the animated cosmology and enter one of the most controversial and for me most interesting subjects, the temple. The LDS temple is not simply another Sunday worship service. It contains ordinances and covenants that are considered sacred. And the LDS system connects temple ordinances, including sealing, to eternal family relationships and exaltation. This connection is not an anti- Mormon invention. It is central to LDS temple theology. But here's where the God makers become particularly complicated because the film portrays rituals from its own historical period. Temple ceremonies have indeed changed. People have spoken about that. Therefore, if someone watches the God makers today and says that is exactly what happens in an LDS temple today, that is not a safe historical statement. The correct question is what was being practiced when the documentary was made and then what has changed since then? That is an entirely different investigation and we're going to do that investigation later on. Receipt number 14, eternal marriage. Another major component is eternal marriages. Does Mormonism teach that marriage can continue beyond death? Yes. This is a fundamental LDS doctrine. The idea is tied to a temple ceiling. And this becomes important because the Godmakers connect eternal marriage to exaltation. Again, there is a genuine doctrinal relationship there. Receipt number 15. polygamy. Now, we need to separate another pair of ideas that are frequently mashed together. Eternal marriage and plural marriage. They are not identical. The early Mormon church practiced plural marriage. That is an historical fact. And the LDS church itself acknowledges this history. The LDS church got rid of plural marriage simply because it wanted to be a legal state in the union. But historically, the relationship between plural marriage and exaltation is in Mormon doctrine. This comes from doctrine and covenant section 132. Exaltation is gained through the new and everlasting covenant. The terms and conditions of that covenant are set forth. Celestial marriage and continuation of the family unit enable men to become gods. The straight and narrow way leads to eternal lives. The law is given relatively to blaspheme against the Holy Ghost. Promises of eternal increase and exaltation are made to prophets and saints of all ages. Joseph Smith is given the power to bind and seal on earth as in heaven. The Lord seals upon him his exaltation. Emma Smith is counseledled to be faithful and true. Laws governing plural marriage are set forth. Verily thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph that in as much as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand where and I the Lord justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and also Moses, David, and Solomon my servants as touching the principle and doctrine of having many wives and concubines. Behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as touching this matter. Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you, for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same. For behold, I reveal unto you a new and everlasting covenant. And if you abide not that covenant, then are ye damned. For no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory. For all who will have a blessing at my hands shall abide by the law which was appointed for that blessing and the condition thereof as were instituted from before the foundation of the world. Okay. All right. So let's um let's go ahead and look at when the Mormon church got rid of polygamy. So the LDS church officially began ending polygamy in 1890 with the issuance of the manifesto though the complete cessation took over a decade. So here we go. 1890 the first manifesto the church president Wilfford Woodruff issued a public proclamation advising church members to stop entering into new plural marriages largely due to intense pressure. federal anti-polygamy laws and threats from the US government. Okay. So, in order for Utah to be a state, it had to abide by, rightfully so, a federal law saying you cannot do plural marriages. Now, if we go to um the actual LDS website, plural marriages in families in early Utah, it says from the LDS website, the Bible and the Book of Mormon teach that the marriage of one man and one woman is God's standard, except at specific periods when he has declared otherwise. In accordance with the revelation to Joseph Smith, the practice of plural marriage, the marriage of one man to two or more women, was instituted among members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Therefore, more than half a century, plural marriage was practiced by some Latter-day Saints. Only the church president held the keys authorizing the performance of new plural marriages. In 1890, the Lord inspired church President Will Wilfr Woodruff to issue a statement that led to the end of the practice of plural marriage in the church. Funny, right? It was the pressure. You know how God can change his mind when the government starts pressuring Utah to stop doing plural marriages? Why do we not do plural marriages? Because it's sex trafficking. Okay. So in this statement known as the manifesto, President Woodruff declared his intentions to abide by US law forbidding plural marriage and use his influence to convince members of the church to do likewise. And this is where it gets really complicated because there are there are opposing ideas on the LDS website and I think this really confuses Mormons. Now, I believe from what my research is that the Mormons do believe that in order to be the highest level of what they believe is heaven. Let me make that clear. In Christianity, we don't believe their levels of heaven. We don't believe in a pecking order like that. We I'm I'm not a Christian anymore, but Christians don't believe in a pecking order when it comes to heaven. But to be in the highest kingdom that you need three wives. Loren has t has spoken about this. So, a lot of Mormons today who are mainstream LDS believe that when they die, even though they're monogamous now, they will be polygamist in heaven. So, I want to actually go to a an article written by an actual Mormon on the the Medium website, and I'll again I'm going to put all these links down below so you can you can read it for yourself. So, it's titled, "How can the LDS church clarify polygamy in heaven?" The writer starts out, "The LDS church has a polygamy problem even now, a century after the practice was discontinued. As most everyone knows, I'm a Mormon." The author is a Mormon, a member of the LDS church. It is the center of my family's life. I love my Mormon community. The way we bring meals over when someone's sick and check on our neighbors after a blizzard. I love the way we grapple with difficult questions and strive to find meaning in life, often through service to others and love for family. And I love our semi-radical theology, which boldly affirms the divinity of humanity and the familiar nature of heaven. The Mormon LDS community is my home. So, I care about the position that the LDS church takes or in this case doesn't take. Polygamy in the LDS context is the usual manner of referring to the practice of a man taking more than one wife as recorded by the official church history. It was taught that an eternal law of marriage by the church from its early days in the 1830s until 1890s. It is now clear that any Mormon who practices polygamy on earth is out of compliance with God's law. They are excommunicated from church membership if they do so. But another question remains very unsettled and it causes riffs in family and hearts within the church. What's the status of polygamy in heaven? Mormons believe that marriage will exist in heaven. However, there is a disagreement on whether that includes polygamy. Some modern members of the LDS church are convinced that polygamy will not be required in heaven and or even allowed in heaven. Uh but based on scriptures and statements of church leaders, they state their belief that marriage in heaven will be one husband and one wife. But the very fact that they must argue their point indicates that the opposite belief is also common is also common among Mormons that polygamy will be practiced or even required in heaven in the celestial kingdom. This belief is not without support from past church leaders. Brigham Young said, "The only man who becomes God, even the sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy." Others such as John Taylor and Joseph F. Smith are on record with similar statements. Orson Pratt even taught that God the Father had plural plurality of wives. A good outline of a belief is eternal polygamy from an apparently faithful member of the church is the first comment on this podcast by Buffy Snail. As a child, I also believed in polygamy in heaven. So I must assume the belief was common among the members who surrounded me. With such confusion on doctrine, we should not be surprised that the church members differ in their belief on the issue. Particularly because the church official position on the issue can be summarized by this statement from 2005 manual for seminary teachers who teach the youth of the church. Note, avoid sensationalism and speculation when talking about plural marriage. Sometimes teachers speculate that plural marriage will be a requirement for all who enter the celestial kingdom. We have no knowledge that plural marriage will be a requirement for exaltation. No knowledge. The church has the right to take this position. Of course, I don't ask church leaders to declare God's reason for allowing World War I or the Syrian refugee crisis. But on the issue of polygamy, I believe the LDS church ignores heartache caused by its own retinence of the doctrine of its eternal status. Carol Lynn Pearson documents this heartache beautifully in the ghost of eternal polygamy. The book is a mixture of her personal insight about polygamy and quotations from women and men who have been negatively affected by the church's direction or lack thereof on the issue. The entire book is worth reading. I quote just one person uh referenced by the author. When my husband told me one day after many years of marriage, that he fully intended to be obedient to God in all things, including plural marriage, I felt a terrible rift being born between us. I asked him how we could be one as the Lord commands if he was desiring another woman, desiring her and her and her and her. How could this be heaven for me? He replied that I would be as happy as I would choose to be. That our children would soothe my loneliness. That's such a yes. All the women are rolling their eyes right now. Plus, he added, "God will make you like it. He wants you to be happy. Since in the rift is Since then, the rift is ever there. A part of me is walled off, wondering how I can live with a man who looks forward to this future, knowing it pains me terribly, but feeling my suffering isn't his problem or concern. He has said only selfish and weak women reject polygamy because if God commands it, it is holy and pure. It is it is because of the suffering. It is because of the suffering multiplied by thousands across the church that I feel the need to speak out. I believe the LDS church must seek revelation and make a doctrinal stand on the eternal status of polygamy in heaven in general conference or online or online. I see three likely options for a doctrinal statement. So again, I'm not going to read the whole article. You guys can um can read it if you want, but I know a lot of Mormons that I personally know uh do believe that to be in the celestial kingdom, which I guess is the um the highest level, if I can remember correctly, you're going to have to have more than one wife, like three wives. Receipt 16, Mormon doctrine and the living prophet. Now I want to return to the issue that we started with because this is where the whole investigation becomes philosophically interesting. If you have a living prophet, continued revelation, additional scripture, and an evolving institutional interpretation, then historical theology becomes layered. The LDS church itself describes the current prophet and apostles as continuing to receive revelation to guide the church. And that means a Mormon can legitimately say that was taught in the past, but we don't teach it that way now. And a historian can simultaneously say, "Yes, but here's the document showing that it was taught." Those are not necessarily contradictions. Those are statements about different points in time. And this is why Bruce McConi is so important because Bruce McConi gives us a snapshot. He represents a particular period in LDS theological development and Mormon doctrine became a massive repository of that period's theology. So when Decker and Hunt went looking for Mormon doctrine they found Mccon. When they found Mccon they found older and still current Mormon teachings. And when we look at the older and current Mormon teachings we find Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith takes us into the 19th century and that's where things get really interesting because once we go backwards from Makoni we encounter Joseph Fieldingsmith Brigham Young John Taylor Orson Pratt the book of Abraham the doctrine and covenants the Navajo temple freemasonry plural marriage the king flet discourse and the development of the Mormon concept of God himself. self. So history is never a straight line. It's always a web. And that's why the simplistic arguments always fail. So what have we actually proven? Let's stop and summarize. Claim one, the God makers use Mormon sources. Yes. Claim two, the book version explicitly cites Bruce R. Makoni's Mormon doctrine. Yes. Claim three, the basic concept of premortal existence is Mormon theology. Yes. Claim four, the idea of humans as spirit children of heavenly parents is Mormon theology. Yes. Claim five, the doctrine of heavenly mother exists in Mormon theology. Yes, the LDS church still acknowledges it. Claim six, God having an embodied form is found in LDS scripture. Yes. Claim seven, humans becoming like gods is part of the Mormon exaltation theology. Yes. Claim eight, Jesus and Lucifer occupy different roles within Mormon premortal theology. Yes. Claim nine. Colog appears in Mormon scripture. Yes. claim 10. Every dramatic detail presented in the God Makers cartoon is therefore official Mormon doctrine. Yes. So this brings us back home to the name the God makers. Why did Decker call it that? Because at the heart of Mormon doctrine of exaltation is the proposition that human beings have a divine destiny. The LDS church itself currently teaches that humans are children of heavenly parents and have a divine nature and destiny. So the title is not based on absolutely nothing. It is based on a real theological concept. The controversy is mostly over how the concept is interpreted, how literal it is, what historical Mormon leaders said about it, how later prophets changed or clarified things, and how the filmmakers transformed those ideas into a dramatic narrative. So, did the God makers invent Mormonism? No. Did the God makers accurately represent every aspect of Mormonism? Yes. And that's exactly why we need receipts because once we stop shouting and start reading the history becomes much more interesting. The filmmakers had and used sources. McConi had and used sources. Joseph Fielding Smith had and used sources. Brigham Young had sources. Joseph Smith made everything up. And Mormon scripture has its own claims about revelation and authority. So we're going to follow that chain all the way backwards. Not because we have already decided what the answer is because that's where the evidence leads. And the next question perhaps is the most fascinating one of all. If McConi was drawing from earlier Mormon authorities, what did those earlier authorities actually teach about God? Because when we go back to Joseph Smith, we encounter a radically different conception of God than the one most Americans grew up hearing in Sunday school. Joseph Smith talks about a God with a body. A God who was once something else, a God whose children can become like him. a premortal council, heavenly parents, eternal families, and eventually a temple ceremony that appears in Nauvoo at almost exactly the same moment Joseph Smith became a Freemason. Coincidence, borrowing, restoration of an ancient tradition, something else? That's where we're going in our next episode. We're going to be talking about Joseph Smith, Freemasonry, the Nauvoo Temple, and the birth of the Mormon God. Follow the receipts, my friends, and I will see you next time on Esoteric Atlanta.