For decades from the 1970s to the 2000s, “The 17 Points of the True Church” gained widespread popularity among Latter-day Saints. Shared in firesides, missionary discussions, and seminary classes and passed along through photocopies and early internet forums, the list was presented as a scriptural checklist for identifying Christ’s “true church.” Not surprisingly, it was said that only The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints matched all seventeen points.

As the story goes, a group of college students set out to find the true church by studying the Bible. They supposedly compiled these 17 points independently, without influence from any denomination, and through sincere investigation, arrived at the LDS Church as the only one that fulfilled them all.

It’s a powerful narrative, but there’s just one problem: there’s no verifiable evidence it ever happened. There are no names, schools, publications, or documented history—just a feel-good story passed down in Mormon folklore. Like many LDS faith-promoting tales, it’s emotionally compelling but historically unsupported. The story appeals to a desire for biblical certainty but lacks substance.

This matters to me personally. My own father still believes in these 17 points. In fact, he sent them to me within the last year as a way of trying to reaffirm that the LDS Church is true—citing them as undeniable, scripturally supported evidence. I love my dad, and I know his intentions are sincere. But sincerity doesn’t make something true. It’s deeply painful to see people I care about placing their faith in something built more on folklore and misused Scripture than on the clear, contextual teaching of God’s Word.

Many people have been deceived by these points because they sincerely trusted something that sounded scriptural and seemed to offer a straightforward way to validate the LDS Church. But upon closer examination, it reveals a pattern of cherry-picking and proof-texting: lifting verses out of context to support pre-existing beliefs.

Over time, as biblical literacy has increased and access to credible scholarship has grown the “17 Points” have quietly fallen out of favor. While still circulated informally among lay members, modern LDS apologetics and official publications have largely abandoned the list.

Why? Because it simply doesn’t hold up. Its use of Scripture is shallow, its theology is thin, and its claims are easily dismantled under very simple contextual biblical study.

Today, we will unpack each point individually—not out of hostility but out of a desire to pursue truth. Fair warning: This is going to be a behemoth of a post.

The goal is to examine what Scripture actually teaches about the church and to invite all readers—especially those from an LDS background—to move beyond folklore and into the richness of God’s Word.

For those still holding to the list, I invite you to read with an open Bible and heart.

Point 1: Christ Organized the Church

Claim: Christ personally organized His Church with a specific hierarchical structure, which must exist in today’s one true church.

Proof Text: Ephesians 4:11–14 (NRSV)

“The gifts he gave were that some would be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ…”

Yes, Christ Organized the Church

The New Testament clearly affirms that Christ organized His Church. He did not leave His people without guidance. Instead, He gave them gifts—people equipped to teach, shepherd, encourage, and build up the body of believers. The list begins with a solid truth: the Church is Christ’s creation, not man’s invention.

But What Does Ephesians 4 Actually Say?

While the list points to Ephesians 4:11–14 to support its claim, the passage itself tells a different story. Paul is not describing an organization or hierarchy—he is explaining how Christ equips the church with various gifts for spiritual growth and maturity. The focus here is not on titles or governing authority but on function: helping believers grow into unity, stability, and maturity in Christ.

The broader context of Ephesians 4 reinforces this. Paul begins the chapter by urging believers to walk in humility and unity, stressing that there is “one body and one Spirit… one Lord, one faith, one baptism.” He emphasizes that grace is given to each believer according to Christ’s measure. Then, he explains how Christ gives specific roles to help the church grow. These are not rigid offices of institutional power—they are expressions of grace intended to build up the whole body.

In fact, the passage culminates not in institutional hierarchy but in the image of a body “joined and knit together by every ligament,” growing as each part does its work. This organic picture shows the church growing from within, empowered by Christ, and held together by love—not by a centralized governing authority.

Conclusion: A Spiritual Body, Not a Bureaucratic One

Ephesians 4:11–14 teaches that Christ organized His Church by giving gifts to His people, not by setting up a strict governing hierarchy to be replicated in every age. The reading of this passage implied by the list imposes a modern institutional model onto a text that describes something spiritual, dynamic, and organic.

Yes, Christ organized the church. But the true church is built around the living Christ, not around a rigidly defined leadership structure. Its strength comes from the Spirit’s gifts at work in each believer, not from a centralized chain of command. The church grows not through hierarchy but through Christ, who joins every part together in love.

Point 2: The True Church Must Bear the Name of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 5:23)

Claim: The true church must include “Jesus Christ” in its official name. If a church doesn’t have His name in its title, it cannot be His.

Proof Text: Ephesians 5:23 (NRSV)

“For the husband is the head of the wife just as Christ is the head of the church, the body of which he is the Savior.”

Yes, the Church Belongs to Christ

This point contains a truth that believers across traditions—including my own background in the Churches of Christ—can affirm: the church belongs to Jesus. He is its head, its Savior, and its reason for existence. It is right to speak of “the Church of Christ,” and it is good for a church to clarify that identity.

Ephesians 5:23 rightly emphasizes Christ’s role as head of the church. The church does not belong to a man, a movement, or a prophet—it belongs to Christ alone.

But What Does Ephesians 5 Actually Say?

The list’s use of this passage suggests that Paul is imposing a naming requirement—that the church must include “Jesus Christ” in its official title. But that’s not what the verse is saying.

Ephesians 5 is about relationships. Paul is comparing the relationship between Christ and the Church to that of a husband and wife. The passage focuses on Christ’s loving, sacrificial leadership, not on what the church is called. In fact, nothing in the surrounding verses has anything to do with naming conventions. The idea that this verse teaches a specific naming requirement is entirely read into the text.

What About Church Names in the New Testament?

If we look at how the early church was actually described in Scripture, we find several names:

• “Church of God” (1 Cor. 1:2)
• “Church of the Firstborn” (Heb. 12:23)
• “Churches of Christ” (Rom. 16:16)
• “The Way” (Acts 9:2)
• “Church in [city]” (Rev. 2–3, Rom. 16:1)

These names emphasize various aspects of the church’s identity and affirm Christ’s ownership and centrality. But no single title is ever mandated or presented as the exclusive name of the one true church. The point is not what it’s called (although that can be a helpful identifier) but who it belongs to.

Conclusion: Ownership, Not Branding

Ephesians 5:23 powerfully affirms that the church belongs to Jesus Christ. But it does not teach that the church, as a universal institution, must bear His name in its official title. The implied reading from the list imports a naming requirement that the text never mentions.

The true church is known by its submission to Christ, not by the sign over the door. It is Christ’s because He purchased it with His blood—not because of its legal or institutional name. A name that honors Christ is good, but faithfulness to Christ ultimately defines His Church.

Point 3: The True Church Must Have a Foundation of Apostles and Prophets

Claim: The true Church must be built upon living apostles and prophets. Without these offices continuing today, the church cannot be complete or authorized by God.

Proof Text: Ephesians 2:19–20 (NRSV)

“So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the cornerstone.”

Yes, the Church Was Built on Apostles and Prophets

Ephesians 2:19–20 affirms that the church is not a loose association of believers but a spiritual household built intentionally by God. Apostles and prophets played a vital role in laying its foundation. Christ Himself is the cornerstone, giving the whole structure shape, alignment, and strength.

The apostles were eyewitnesses of Christ’s resurrection and were commissioned directly by Him. The prophets proclaimed God’s Word, calling His people to faithfulness. Together, they provided the foundational teaching and witness upon which the church was established.

But What Does Ephesians 2 Actually Say?

While the LDS use this passage to argue that apostles and prophets must continue in every generation, Paul is describing something different. He’s talking about a foundation laid once, not repeatedly.

Ephesians 2 uses the metaphor of a building. No builder keeps relaying the foundation after the structure begins to grow. The original apostles and prophets—those who witnessed Christ, taught His gospel, and revealed His Word—served in this unrepeatable foundational role. What comes after is built on their teaching, not a continuation of their office.

Apostles Were Not a Permanent Governing Body

The LDS Church treats the word “apostle” as referring exclusively to a fixed body of twelve men who govern the modern church. But in the New Testament, the term “apostle” (ἀπόστολος, apostolos) simply means “one who is sent” and was applied to more than just the Twelve:

• Paul is called an apostle (Romans 1:1)
• Barnabas is called an apostle (Acts 14:14)
• James, the Lord’s brother, is also called an apostle (Galatians 1:19)
• Andronicus and Junia are called “outstanding among the apostles” (Romans 16:7)

Clearly, the role of an apostle was broader and more functional, not limited to a formal office governing the global church. There is no biblical concept of a standing “Quorum of the Twelve Apostles” as an authoritative ruling body.

Prophets Were Not Hierarchical Leaders

The LDS Church teaches that a modern prophet must stand at the head of the church and receive revelation for all. But in the New Testament, prophets were not rulers—they were truth-speakers within the community:

• Agabus is called a prophet (Acts 11:28), yet he held no governance office.
• In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul describes congregational prophecy as something done by many, subject to evaluation by others (vv. 29–31).

The Greek word prophētēs means both foretelling (prediction) and forth-telling (proclamation of truth). The New Testament model involves many prophets speaking as led by the Spirit—not a single office ruling the church or delivering new doctrinal revelations.

Conclusion: A Complete Foundation, Not a Rebuilt One

Ephesians 2:19–20 teaches that the church is built on the once-for-all foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ as the cornerstone. That foundation does not need to be restored or rebuilt. The LDS claim that living apostles and prophets are required today misunderstands both the metaphor Paul uses and the roles those leaders played in the early church.

The true church grows by faithfully building on what has already been laid—the gospel of Christ and the teachings of His appointed messengers—not by trying to recreate or centralize that foundation in modern offices of authority.

Point 4: The True Church Must Have the Same Organization as Christ’s Church

Claim: The one true Church must be organized exactly as Christ established initially—with the same offices and structure. If a church does not replicate this exact organization, it cannot be the true church.

Proof Text: Ephesians 4:11–14 (NRSV)

“The gifts he gave were that some would be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry…”

Yes, Christ Gave Structure to the Church

We’ve already dealt with this passage once when we recognized that Christ did leave His Church with certain gifts to build it up. Yet, here it is again, and the implication is that the one true church must have these particular offices. We already know this passage isn’t a prescription for offices but a description of gifts.

I will say this: there is real value in acknowledging that the church functions best when gifted individuals serve in their calling for the benefit of all. The early church was not disorganized or leaderless—it had structure and accountability. But the form of organization that Jesus and His apostles established is not what the LDS Church claims it is. The New Testament Church was built around local leadership, not centralized authority.

What Structure Did Christ Actually Leave?

When we ask what organizational structure Christ left behind, the New Testament gives us a clear and consistent answer:

• Elders (also called overseers or shepherds) were appointed in every local congregation (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5; 1 Peter 5:1–2).
• Deacons served alongside elders to meet the practical needs of the church (Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:8–13).
• These were plural and localized roles—not global offices.

There is no evidence of a centralized governing body, such as a First Presidency or Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. The apostles in Jerusalem exercised leadership, but even they deferred to the Holy Spirit and worked in cooperation with local leaders (Acts 15).

The New Testament model is simple, local, and servant-oriented, not hierarchical and centralized.

Conclusion: Christ’s Structure Was Local, Not Hierarchical

Ephesians 4:11–14 teaches that Christ equipped His Church with gifted individuals, not that He established a rigid institutional structure to be mirrored in perpetuity.

The actual structure Christ and the apostles left behind was rooted in plural eldership, local accountability, and servant leadership, not in a global hierarchy. The LDS Church’s organizational model is not a restoration of the biblical church—it’s a reinvention of something that never existed in the first place.

Point 5: The True Church Must Claim Divine Authority

Claim: The true church must have divine authority to act in God’s name. Without a formal, authorized priesthood, a church cannot truly represent God or perform valid ordinances.

Proof Text: Hebrews 5:4–10 (NRSV)

“And one does not presume to take this honor, but takes it only when called by God, just as Aaron was… So also Christ did not glorify himself in becoming a high priest…”

Yes, No One Presumes to Take God’s Authority

The basic principle in this passage is valid: no one takes spiritual authority on their own. In the Old Testament, the priesthood was by divine appointment. Hebrews 5:4 affirms that those who serve in holy roles must be called by God, not self-appointed.

Christ did not assume His priestly role without being appointed by the Father. His priesthood is described as being “after the order of Melchizedek”—distinct from the Levitical priesthood and grounded in divine commission. So, the text rightly teaches that divine appointment matters.

But What Does Hebrews 5 Actually Say?

The LDS reading of this passage imposes a system that the text does not support. The author of Hebrews does not discuss authority within the institutional church or how modern church leaders should be called. He discusses Christ’s unique, heavenly priesthood, not priesthood offices passed on to others.

Key context:

• The entire chapter contrasts Christ’s superior priesthood with the temporary, earthly priesthood of the Old Covenant.
• Christ’s priesthood is once-for-all, eternal, and unshared.
• Hebrews never mentions the idea of priesthood being passed to others after Christ. In fact, it argues that Christ’s priesthood abolishes the old system (Heb. 7:11–12).

So while the text affirms divine calling, it does not support the LDS idea of an inherited or restored priesthood authority.

What About Authority in the New Testament Church?

In the New Testament, spiritual authority is absolute—but it comes through the Holy Spirit, not through priesthood lineage:

• Leaders were appointed by the Holy Spirit (Acts 13:2–3), not by priesthood succession.
• All believers are called a royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:9), indicating direct access to God through Christ.
• The emphasis is on servant leadership and gifting, not institutional authorization (Romans 12:4–8; 1 Cor. 12:28).

The LDS claim that only their priesthood holders have the authority to teach, baptize, or lead is foreign to the New Testament, where authority is always grounded in calling, gifting, and fidelity to Christ’s teaching—not in a formalized priesthood hierarchy.

Conclusion: Authority Comes from Christ, Not a Restored Priesthood

Hebrews 5:4–10 teaches that Christ was divinely appointed, just as Old Testament priests were. However, it does not support the LDS view that divine authority must be passed down through an institutional priesthood. The priesthood of Christ is unique, unchangeable, and not shared with modern church leaders.

The true church does not need to restore a Levitical-style priesthood authority because a) the Levitical priesthood was insufficient to bring true forgiveness of sins, and b) it already has a great High Priest in heaven. Authority in the Church flows from Christ through His Word and His Spirit.

Point 6: The True Church Must Have No Paid Ministry

Claim: The true church will not pay its ministers. Instead, its leaders will serve voluntarily, without salary, following the pattern of Christ and His apostles.

Proof Texts:

• Isaiah 45:13 (NRSV) – “I have aroused Cyrus in righteousness, and I will make all his paths straight; he shall build my city and set my exiles free, not for price or reward, says the Lord of hosts.”
• 1 Peter 5:2 (NRSV) – “Tend the flock of God that is in your charge, exercising the oversight, not under compulsion but willingly, as God would have you do it—not for sordid gain but eagerly.”

Yes, Ministry Must Not Be Driven by Greed

The Bible consistently warns against corrupt or greedy leadership. 1 Peter 5:2 rightly instructs elders to shepherd God’s people willingly and eagerly, not out of compulsion or for “sordid gain.” Peter emphasizes the heart of ministry: it’s not about money but faithful service.

Paul echoes this in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 when describing elders—they must not be lovers of money. Throughout church history, financial abuse by leaders has led to spiritual devastation. So, it is entirely biblical to insist that church leaders must serve for Christ, not for profit.

But What Do These Passages Actually Say?

Isaiah 45:13

This verse is about Cyrus, the Persian king God used to free the exiles and rebuild Jerusalem. The point is that Cyrus would act without demanding payment—as an act of God’s providence.

This has nothing to do with church leadership or pastoral compensation. It’s a prophecy about a pagan king fulfilling God’s purposes—not an instruction for church governance. Using this verse to oppose paid ministry is a clear case of proof-texting out of context.

1 Peter 5:2

This verse warns elders not to serve for greedy gain. But this is not the same as prohibiting financial support altogether. In fact, it aligns perfectly with Paul’s instructions elsewhere:

• 1 Timothy 5:17–18 – “Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching… the laborer deserves to be paid.”
• 1 Corinthians 9:14 – “The Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel.”

The early church financially supported its ministers. The issue is not whether ministers can be paid but why they serve. Greedy, manipulative ministry is condemned, while faithful ministry supported financially and materially by the Church is biblically endorsed.

Conclusion: Greed Is Condemned, But Paid Ministry Is Biblical

The LDS claim that paid ministry is unbiblical fails to distinguish between corrupt motives and proper support. The New Testament allows and even commands that ministers be provided for—not to enrich them, but so they can devote themselves entirely to the work of the gospel.

Isaiah 45:13 is entirely misapplied, and 1 Peter 5:2 cautions against greed, not against pay. The biblical model is not a volunteer-only clergy but faithful, accountable leaders worthy of honor and support.

Point 7: The True Church Must Baptize by Immersion

Claim: The one true church must practice baptism exclusively by immersion, following the example of Jesus and the teachings of the New Testament.

Proof Text: Matthew 3:13–16 (NRSV)

“Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan, to be baptized by him… And when Jesus had been baptized, just as he came up from the water…”

Yes, Immersion Is the Biblical Mode of Baptism

The New Testament strongly supports baptism by immersion as the normative practice. The language of Matthew 3:16—”he came up from the water”—implies that Jesus was fully immersed. This fits with the meaning of the Greek word baptizō, which means to dip, plunge, or immerse.

Other passages also support immersion:

• Romans 6:4 describes baptism as a burial with Christ.
• Acts 8:38–39 recounts Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch going down into the water and then coming back up.

So in this case, the point is valid: immersion is the biblical mode of baptism, and it is important to honor what Scripture clearly presents.

But Is This Practice Unique to the LDS Church? No.

While the LDS Church does practice baptism by immersion, it is far from unique in doing so.

Many Christian groups—especially within the Restorationist tradition, such as the Churches of Christ, Baptists, Pentecostals, and non-denominational evangelicals—also teach and practice immersion as the only valid form of baptism. This is not a distinctive mark of the LDS Church.

In fact, LDS baptism differs from biblical baptism in more substantive ways:

• It requires authorization by priesthood holders exclusive to their church.
• It is tied to joining an institutional organization.
• It is performed as part of an elaborate system of ordinances, including baptism for the dead, which has no biblical basis.

So while LDS baptism uses immersion, it does so within a theological system that departs from New Testament teaching in more serious ways.

Conclusion: Right Mode, Wrong Meaning

Baptism by immersion is biblical, so this point is correct. But the mode is only one part of the picture. The meaning, context, and theology of baptism are just as important.

The LDS Church shares the form of baptism by immersion with many others—but distorts its function by linking it to institutional authority and additional, unbiblical doctrines. The true church baptizes believers in obedience to Christ, not into a restored hierarchy.

Point 8: The True Church Must Bestow the Gift of the Holy Ghost by the Laying on of Hands

Claim: The one true church must confer the Holy Ghost through a physical ordinance performed by authorized priesthood holders, specifically by the laying on of hands.

Proof Text: Acts 8:14–17 (NRSV)

“Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them… Then Peter and John laid their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.”

Yes, the Laying on of Hands Occurs in the New Testament

Acts 8 records a genuine example of believers receiving the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands. The apostles Peter and John come to Samaria and pray for baptized believers, and the Spirit is given. This was an actual event; the text does not downplay its significance.

It shows that in some cases, God chose to bestow the Spirit through apostolic action—especially in critical transitional moments in spreading the gospel beyond Jerusalem. So yes, this practice is biblical.

But What Does Acts 8 Actually Say?

The LDS Church takes this one passage and turns it into a universal mandate—that the Spirit can only be given by priesthood authority by laying on hands. But this reading reverses the purpose of the passage.

Acts 8 is descriptive, not prescriptive. It recounts a special event in redemptive history—the first inclusion of Samaritans into the Church (Acts 1:8 being fulfilled). There is no indication that this method must be repeated in every case, and in fact, it isn’t:

• Acts 10:44–48 – The Spirit falls on Cornelius and his household before baptism or laying on of hands.
• Acts 2:38 – Peter says, “Repent and be baptized… and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit,” with no mention of hands.
• Galatians 3:2 – Paul connects the Spirit’s arrival to faith, not ritual: “Did you receive the Spirit by doing the works of the law or by believing what you heard?”

In other words, God is not bound to a ritual mechanism. His Spirit moves according to His will, not according to a human-mediated ordinance.

This Is a Ceiling, Not a Floor

The LDS reading treats Acts 8 as the bare minimum—a floor below which no true Church can fall. But biblically, it’s the opposite. This moment is a ceiling, a unique expression of God’s power and unity during a critical stage in Church history.

To make this a requirement for all future believers, a special event must be twisted and turned into an institutional law. Instead of seeing Acts 8 as an example of God’s grace, the LDS framework transforms it into a barrier to the Spirit’s freedom.

The text was meant to show how wide the Spirit’s reach is, not how narrow the rules are. Acts 8 expands the vision of who can receive the Spirit—not limits how the Spirit is received.

Conclusion: The Spirit Comes by Faith, Not Ritual

Yes, the apostles once laid hands on believers to impart the Holy Spirit—but the New Testament shows other equally valid ways the Spirit was received. The Spirit is given through faith, not bound to priesthood or ritual.

The LDS view imposes a rigid ceiling and calls it the floor. But the New Testament shows that the Spirit is not controlled by any particular institution. The church does not dispense the Holy Spirit—Christ does, giving it freely to all who believe.

Point 9: The True Church Must Practice Divine Healing

Claim: The true church must have the power to perform divine healings—restoring health through priesthood authority, just as Jesus and His apostles did.

Proof Text: Mark 3:14–15 (NRSV)

“And he appointed twelve, whom he also named apostles, to be with him, and to be sent out to proclaim the message, and to have authority to cast out demons.”

Yes, Jesus Empowered His Apostles to Heal

Jesus absolutely gave His apostles authority to heal and cast out demons. Healing was a visible sign that the Kingdom of God was breaking into the world. The gospels show Jesus healing the sick, raising the dead, and giving this authority to His apostles as they proclaimed the gospel.

Mark 3:14–15 confirms this: healing and proclamation went hand in hand. The apostles’ miracles served as signs to validate their message—that Jesus is Lord and the Kingdom has arrived.

But What Does Mark 3 Actually Say?

This passage does not establish a requirement for institutional healing power in all future churches. It describes what Jesus gave to the original Twelve, not a universal rule that every church must replicate in its leadership structure or ministry pattern. More importantly, this passage says nothing about priesthood or church ordinances.

Healing in the New Testament is certainly real and often connected with prayer and faith—but it is not confined to a particular office:

• James 5:14–15 – “Are any among you sick? They should call for the elders of the church and have them pray over them… The prayer of faith will save the sick.” No mention of priesthood—just faith-filled prayer by local church leaders.
• 1 Corinthians 12:9 – Healing is a spiritual gift the Holy Spirit distributes as He wills, not conferred through ordination.
• Even ordinary believers exercised healing gifts (Acts 9:17–18; Acts 28:8–9), showing that God’s power is not tied to a formal priesthood structure.

Mark 3 presents a high point in redemptive history: Jesus gave the Twelve a unique commission that included healing. That moment should inspire faith—but it was never meant to define a standard institutional requirement.

The LDS reading once again turns it into a floor—suggesting that a church without visible, formal healing rites is invalid. But biblically, healing is a gift, not a mark of organizational authenticity.

The Spirit is not boxed in by ecclesiastical structure. God heals through prayer, faith, and sovereign will, not through authorized rituals alone.

Conclusion: Healing Is a Gift, Not a Credential

Mark 3:14–15 records Jesus commissioning His apostles to preach and heal. However, it does not teach that healing must be present in every church or that healing power validates priesthood authority.

The New Testament presents healing as a spiritual gift—granted freely by the Spirit and not monopolized by a priesthood. The presence or absence of miraculous healing does not define the true church. What matters is whether Christ is present, the gospel is preached, and the Spirit is at work.

Point 10: The True Church Must Teach That God and Jesus Are Separate and Distinct Individuals

Claim: The true church must reject the doctrine of the Trinity and teach that God the Father and Jesus Christ are separate, distinct individuals—physically and ontologically separate beings.

Proof Texts:

• John 17:11 (NRSV) – “Holy Father, protect them in your name that you have given me, so that they may be one, as we are one.”
• John 20:17 (NRSV) – “I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.”

Yes, the Father and the Son Are Relationally Distinct

Scripture clearly presents the Father and the Son as distinct persons. Jesus prays to the Father, obeys the Father, and speaks of His relationship with the Father in personal terms.

In John 17:11, He prays that His followers would be one as He and the Father are one—a profound expression of unity, but clearly one that includes distinction of persons.

Likewise, in John 20:17, Jesus refers to the Father as “my God and your God,” underscoring His unique relationship with the Father in His role as the risen Son. These verses affirm the personal distinction between the Father and the Son.

But What Do These Passages Actually Say?

While the LDS Church uses these verses to deny the Trinity, the passages do not teach that the Father and the Son are separate beings or gods. Instead, they affirm that while the Father and Son are distinct in person, they are one in essence—the very heart of Trinitarian doctrine.

John 17:11

• Jesus prays that His disciples would be one as He and the Father are one—clearly, this is not about physical unity or shared flesh and bone.
• Jesus speaks of relational and spiritual unity—a shared will, love, mission, and glory (see v. 21–23).
• The LDS claim that this verse proves God and Jesus are “two beings” misses the metaphorical and theological nature of the oneness described.

John 20:17

• Jesus speaks as the risen Messiah, affirming the Father as His God in His incarnate, resurrected state.
• This verse does not deny Jesus’ divinity—it reflects His role as mediator and obedient Son.
• In context, this verse does not say anything about the Father and Son being two separate gods or beings—it affirms their relationship within the framework of redemptive history.

Denial of the Trinity

The LDS teaching here is not a minor difference—it is a direct denial of the Trinity, the central and historic confession of the Christian faith.

• John 1:1 – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
• Isaiah 44:6 – “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.”
• Deuteronomy 6:4 – “Hear, O Israel: The Lord is our God, the Lord alone.”

The Bible teaches monotheism—only one God exists—and that within the one being of God, there are three coequal, coeternal persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

The LDS view teaches that God the Father and Jesus are separate gods, both with physical bodies, and the Holy Spirit is a third being. This is not biblical theology—it is tri-theism, a rejection of both the Old and New Testament witness to the nature of God.

Conclusion: One God in Three Persons, Not Three Gods

John 17:11 and 20:17 affirm the distinct personhood of the Father and Son, but not separate divine beings. The LDS use of these verses to deny the Trinity imposes a theology that the Bible flatly contradicts.

The true church confesses the mystery and majesty of the Triune God: one God, eternally existing as Father, Son, and Spirit. Anything less or more is a distortion of who God truly is.

Point 11: The True Church Must Teach That God and Jesus Have Bodies of Flesh and Bone

Claim: The true church must teach that God the Father and Jesus Christ possess physical bodies of flesh and bone. This is based on the claim that resurrected beings—including God—are tangible, corporeal, and eternally embodied.

Proof Texts:

• Luke 24:36–39 (NRSV) – “Touch me and see; for a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.”
• Acts 1:9–11 (NRSV) – “This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven.”

Yes, the Risen Jesus Has a Glorified Body

The resurrection of Jesus is central to the Christian faith, and the New Testament affirms that it was bodily, not merely spiritual. In Luke 24, Jesus invites His disciples to touch Him: He is not a ghost but truly risen in the flesh.

Likewise, Acts 1 tells us that Jesus ascended bodily into heaven and will return “in the same way.” The New Testament affirms Christ’s bodily resurrection and ascension as essential to the gospel. So yes, Jesus now possesses a glorified, immortal body.

But What Do These Passages Actually Say?

The LDS Church uses these verses to go beyond affirming Christ’s bodily resurrection. They claim that God the Father also has a physical body and that divine embodiment is essential to godhood.

But these texts say nothing about the Father having a body. They speak only of Jesus, the incarnate Son, after His resurrection.

Luke 24:36–39

• This passage proves that Jesus rose bodily—not that God the Father is embodied.
• Jesus took on flesh in the incarnation (John 1:14), not from eternity past.
• The distinction is critical: Jesus became flesh, but God the Father never did.

Acts 1:9–11

• Again, this is about Jesus, the God-man, ascending in His glorified human body.
• The promise is about His return, not about God the Father’s nature.

These texts do not even suggest that the Father is physical. In fact, they reinforce that Jesus alone is the incarnate one—God made visible in human form.

Heresy, Not Just Error

The LDS claim that God the Father is an exalted man with a physical body is not just a misinterpretation—it is heretical. It denies God’s spiritual nature, His omnipresence, and His eternal, uncreated being.

Scripture is explicit:

• John 4:24 – “God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”
• Numbers 23:19 – “God is not a man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind.”
• 1 Timothy 1:17 – “To the King of the ages, immortal, invisible, the only God…”

God the Father is not visible, embodied, or limited by physicality. He is eternally spiritual, uncreated, and unchanging.

To claim that God has a body is to reduce Him to a creature, to deny His eternal nature, and to reject the very essence of biblical monotheism. It collapses the distinction between Creator and creation.

Conclusion: The Incarnate Son, Not an Embodied Father

Luke 24 and Acts 1 teach the bodily resurrection and ascension of Jesus, the eternal Son who became flesh. But these texts say nothing about God the Father having a body.

The LDS teaching that both the Father and Son have flesh-and-bone bodies is not only unsupported by Scripture—it is a heretical redefinition of who God is.

The true church proclaims the one eternal God: the Father who is Spirit, the Son who became flesh, and the Spirit who indwells us. Making God into a man is not to elevate humanity—it is to bring God down to the level of created things.

Point 12: The Officers Must Be Called of God

Claim: The true church must have leaders who are formally and divinely “called of God,” just as Aaron was. This calling must come through priesthood authority, not personal conviction or communal discernment.

Proof Texts:

• Hebrews 5:4 (NRSV) – “And one does not presume to take this honor, but takes it only when called by God, just as Aaron was.”
• Exodus 28:1 (NRSV) – “Then bring near to you your brother Aaron, and his sons with him, from among the Israelites, to serve me as priests…”
• Exodus 40:13–16 (NRSV) – “You shall put the holy garments on Aaron, and anoint him and consecrate him, so that he may serve me as priest.”

Yes, Ministry Must Be by God’s Appointment

Hebrews 5:4 is crystal clear—no one takes spiritual authority on their own initiative. Aaron did not volunteer for the priesthood; he was called by God. In that sense, the point stands: leaders in God’s house must be called, not self-appointed.

The same is true in the New Testament—Christ appoints apostles, elders are recognized and set apart, and ministry is a stewardship, not a personal platform. So yes, calling matters.

But What Do These Passages Actually Say?

The LDS Church uses these verses to argue that church leaders today must be called through an ordained priesthood authority, restored explicitly through Joseph Smith. But this interpretation collapses under biblical scrutiny.

Hebrews 5:4

• The point of the verse is to highlight Christ’s divine appointment as our great High Priest, not to establish a requirement for all future church officers.
• The broader argument in Hebrews is that Christ’s priesthood, unlike Aaron’s, is eternal, singular, and untransferable.
• Hebrews 7:24 – “But he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever.”

Hebrews does not prescribe an ongoing human priesthood—it declares that Jesus’ priesthood has replaced the old system.

Exodus 28:1 & 40:13–16

• These passages describe the institution of the Levitical priesthood, under the Mosaic Covenant, for a specific people and time.
• Aaron and his sons were chosen to serve at the Tabernacle, offering sacrifices on behalf of Israel.
• But this system was fulfilled and brought to an end in Christ (Hebrews 8:6–13). There is no basis for transplanting this model into the New Testament Church.

How Are Leaders Called in the New Testament?

In the New Covenant, God’s calling is mediated through the Spirit and the Church, not a lineage-based priesthood:

• Acts 13:2 – “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.”
• Titus 1:5 – Paul instructs Titus to appoint elders based on qualifications—not ritual.
• 1 Timothy 3 – Leadership is recognized by character, faithfulness, and sound doctrine—not by priesthood office.

The biblical model is Spirit-led, community-discerned leadership, not priesthood succession.

Conclusion: Christ Calls Through His Spirit, Not a Levitical System

Yes, God must call ministers—but not in the way the LDS Church claims. Hebrews 5:4 points to the uniqueness of Christ’s priesthood, not the necessity of restoring Aaron’s line. Exodus 28 describes a covenant that is now obsolete in light of Christ.

In the New Testament Church, God calls through the Spirit, the Word, and the discernment of the body. The LDS model overlays an obsolete system onto the Church Christ Himself already established and secured by His once-for-all priesthood.

Point 13: The True Church Must Claim Revelation from God

Claim: The true church must receive direct revelation from God through living prophets, continuing the prophetic pattern seen in the Old Testament. Without ongoing revelation, God cannot guide the church today.

Proof Text: Amos 3:7 (NRSV)

“Surely the Lord God does nothing, without revealing his secret to his servants the prophets.”

Yes, God Has Spoken Through Prophets

The Bible is filled with examples of God revealing His will through prophets. From Moses to Malachi, God called individuals to speak His word, warn His people, and declare His purposes. Amos 3:7 affirms this: God does not act in redemptive history without first revealing His plans through His appointed messengers.

Prophets were vital to Israel’s covenant life—declaring blessings, pronouncing judgment, and pointing toward the coming Messiah. So yes, revelation through prophets is a fundamental and essential part of redemptive history.

But What Does Amos 3 Actually Say?

Amos 3:7 is often misunderstood when taken out of context. The verse is part of a judgment oracle against Israel. God is saying that He doesn’t bring judgment without warning—and those warnings came through His prophets.

• The context is not about ongoing revelation for church governance or doctrine but God’s covenant faithfulness and prophetic warnings of impending disaster (see Amos 3:1–8).
• Amos emphasizes God’s grace and justice: He warns before He acts. This is not a theological blueprint for continuous, institutional prophecy.

This describes how God worked under the Old Covenant—not a promise that there will always be a living prophet at the head of God’s people.

What Does Revelation Look Like Under the New Covenant?

The New Testament affirms that God still speaks—but it fundamentally shifts how He speaks:

• Hebrews 1:1–2 – “Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son…” The ultimate and final revelation of God is Jesus Christ.
• John 16:13 – Jesus promises that the Holy Spirit will guide His followers into all truth—not a future prophet.
• 2 Timothy 3:16–17 – Scripture is sufficient to equip the man of God for “every good work.”

The New Testament does include the gift of prophecy (e.g., 1 Cor. 14), but it is a distributed spiritual gift, not a centralized prophetic office. Nowhere are churches told to seek or submit to a “living prophet” like the LDS Church claims.

Conclusion: Revelation Culminates in Christ, Not in a Living Prophet

Amos 3:7 reflects how God warned Israel through prophets under the Old Covenant—but it does not support the LDS claim that a living prophet is required for the church today.

In the New Covenant, revelation has culminated in Christ, and the Scriptures He gave us through His apostles are sufficient. God still leads and illuminates His people through the Holy Spirit—but not through a restored prophetic office that claims exclusive authority.

The true church is guided by God’s Word and Spirit, not by an institution that insists it alone can receive divine revelation.

Point 14: The True Church Must Be a Missionary Church

Claim: The true church must actively send missionaries to preach the gospel to all nations. A church that does not engage in worldwide evangelism cannot be the Church Christ established.

Proof Text: Matthew 28:19–20 (NRSV)

“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you…”

Yes, Christ Commanded His Church to Make Disciples

The Great Commission is one of the clearest and most important commands Jesus gave His followers. The church is not called to retreat inward but to go outward—to all nations, proclaiming the gospel, baptizing new believers, and teaching them to obey everything Christ has commanded.

Matthew 28 affirms that a true Church is a missionary Church—grounded in gospel proclamation and committed to reaching the ends of the earth with the good news of Jesus Christ.

But What Does Matthew 28 Actually Say?

The LDS Church uses this verse to validate its undeniably strong emphasis on missionary work. However, the claim that this missionary activity uniquely identifies the true church overreaches the passage’s intent.

Jesus’ command in Matthew 28 is for all His disciples, not just a specific institution. The text commissions the church collectively—not through a restored priesthood, not through two-year proselytizing programs, and not tied to any particular organizational form.

Moreover, many Christian churches—especially those grounded in Scripture—have a vibrant, global missionary presence. The Churches of Christ, evangelical Protestants, Baptists, Pentecostals, and many others have long sent missionaries worldwide.

The LDS Church does not have a monopoly on fulfilling the Great Commission.

A Missionary Church Is the Expectation, Not the Exclusive Mark

Jesus didn’t say, “The Church that sends out the most missionaries is the only true Church.” He said, “Go and make disciples.” That command applies to all churches, and it is a standard that all must embrace—not a sign that one group has exclusive divine sanction.

To turn this into a mark that only one church possesses is to miss the point of the text entirely. Missionary work is not a badge of exclusivity but a command of obedience.

Conclusion: Obedience to the Great Commission Is a Calling, Not a Claim to Exclusivity

Matthew 28:19–20 affirms that the true church must proclaim the gospel to the nations. In that sense, yes—the church must be missionary in nature. However, the LDS’s use of this passage to uniquely identify their institution misses the point.

The missionary impulse is common to all faithful Christian churches, not unique to one. The true church obeys Christ’s commission—not to prove its exclusivity but to expand Christ’s kingdom through the gospel.

Point 15: The True Church Must Be a Restored Church

Claim: The true church must be a restored church because, according to LDS doctrine, the original church fell into total apostasy after the apostles’ deaths. This alleged apostasy made a full restoration necessary in the latter days, beginning with Joseph Smith.

Proof Text: Acts 3:19–21 (NRSV)

“Repent therefore, and turn to God so that your sins may be wiped out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Messiah, appointed for you—that is, Jesus, who must remain in heaven until the time of universal restoration that God announced long ago through his holy prophets.”

Yes, God Has Promised a Restoration

Acts 3 speaks of a future “restoration of all things,” a phrase that echoes the Old Testament prophets’ vision of a renewed world under the reign of the Messiah. Peter is preaching to Jews, calling them to repentance as God prepares to fulfill His redemptive plan, culminating in Christ’s return.

So yes, restoration is biblical—but the question is, restoration of what?

But What Does Acts 3 Actually Say?

This passage is not about restoring a church organization or priesthood authority that was supposedly lost. It is about the eschatological restoration—the return of Christ, the renewal of creation, and the full realization of God’s kingdom.

The “restoration of all things” is a cosmic hope, not an institutional one. Peter is not speaking of a church that failed and must be rebuilt but of a world waiting to be made new under the returning Christ.

• There is no mention of priesthood offices, ordinances, or institutional collapse here.
• The restoration promised by the prophets includes justice, peace, resurrection, and God dwelling with His people—not the founding of a 19th-century American church.

To make this passage about the LDS Church is to force a modern narrative onto an ancient text.

The Apostasy Theory: A Denial of Christ’s Promise

The LDS doctrine of “restoration” only makes sense if the church completely failed after the apostolic age. If the gospel vanished, priesthood authority was lost, and the gates of Hades prevailed.

But this is exactly what Jesus said would not happen:

• Matthew 16:18 – “I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.”
• John 10:27–28 – “My sheep hear my voice… no one will snatch them out of my hand.”
• Ephesians 3:20–21 – “To him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever.”

To say that the Church Christ founded disappeared is to say that He failed to keep His promises.

To say that God allowed His Church to vanish from the earth for nearly 1,800 years is to imply that He is either powerless or unfaithful—neither of which describes the God of the Bible.

And if God cannot preserve what He began, then He is not a God worthy of our trust, worship, or devotion.

Conclusion: The True Church Is Preserved, Not Restored

Acts 3:21 speaks of the restoration that comes with Christ’s return—not a restored institution. The LDS doctrine of restoration solves a problem that Scripture never creates and undermines the very character of God, who is faithful to all generations.

The true church didn’t need to be restored—it has been preserved by the sovereign hand of Christ. He is the one who said, “I will build my Church.” And if He couldn’t keep it alive, then He was either a liar, a failure, or a fraud—but praise God, He is none of those things.

The church stands today not because it was restored but because it was never lost.

Point 16: The True Church Must Practice Baptism for the Dead

Claim: The true church must practice baptism on behalf of the dead. This is based on the idea that those who died without receiving the gospel still need saving ordinances, and the living must perform them vicariously.

Proof Text: 1 Corinthians 15:29 (NRSV)

“Otherwise, what will those people do who receive baptism on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?”

Yes, 1 Corinthians 15 Mentions Baptism for the Dead

This is the only verse in the Bible that even mentions the idea of baptism on behalf of the dead. Paul references it in a rhetorical argument defending the resurrection: “Why would people do this if the dead aren’t raised?”

So yes, the verse exists. But this raises two far more important questions:

1. What does it actually mean?
2. Does it support LDS baptism for the dead?

But What Does 1 Corinthians 15 Actually Say?

The LDS Church takes this obscure verse and builds an entire theology and temple ordinance on it. But the verse does not teach, endorse, or command baptism for the dead.

Let’s look at it closely:

• Paul says, “What will those do who are baptized for the dead?”—notice: “those,” not “we” or “you.”
• He uses third-person language, distancing himself and the Corinthian believers from the practice.
• He does not say this is a Christian ordinance, nor does he commend or explain it.

In fact, Paul uses the practice as an example to support the resurrection—“Even those people out there who do this strange thing must believe the dead will rise!” He’s not instructing the church to do it—he’s showing how even questionable practices point to a resurrection hope.

Furthermore, this verse stands alone. No other passage in the New Testament mentions, models, or supports vicarious baptism for the dead. It’s not taught, practiced, or commanded.

LDS Baptism for the Dead: A Doctrinal Invention

From this one obscure verse, the LDS Church has constructed an elaborate system involving:

• Temple rituals for the dead
• Genealogical record-keeping
• A doctrine that billions of souls are waiting in the spirit world for ordinances to be performed on their behalf

This is completely absent from Scripture. In fact, the New Testament is clear:

• Hebrews 9:27 – “It is appointed for mortals to die once, and after that the judgment.”
• Luke 16:19–31 – Jesus describes a fixed chasm between the saved and the lost after death. No post-mortem proxy rituals are mentioned.
• 2 Corinthians 6:2 – “Now is the day of salvation.”

There is no second chance after death. Salvation comes through personal faith in Christ in this life.

Conclusion: One Verse, No Support, and a False Doctrine

1 Corinthians 15:29 is a one-line reference to an obscure practice that some were doing, not a teaching that baptism for the dead is a practice of the true church. At best, Paul refers to a practice that others were doing—not one he endorsed. At worst, the LDS Church has taken an ambiguous line and twisted it into a central ordinance with no biblical foundation.

Salvation is not by proxy. It is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ—received personally in this life. The true church preaches repentance, faith, and baptism for the living—not a temple-based ritual system built on speculation and misinterpretation.

Point 17: By Their Fruits Ye Shall Know Them

Claim: The true church can be recognized by its “fruits”—in other words, the moral lives, spiritual success, and visible growth of its members and institution. Good fruits are evidence of divine truth.

Proof Text: Matthew 7:20 (NRSV)

“Thus you will know them by their fruits.”

Yes, Jesus Said We Would Know by Fruits

Matthew 7:20 concludes Jesus’ warning about false prophets. He tells His disciples to evaluate teachers and leaders not just by what they say but by what they produce. Just as a tree is known by its fruit, so too are people and ministries known by the results of their teaching.

So yes—fruit matters. Doctrine that produces godliness, humility, love, and truth is evidence of God’s work. Jesus affirms that a person’s life and legacy reveal their spiritual source.

But What Does Matthew 7 Actually Say?

The LDS use of this verse often appeals to emotional experience or perceived goodness as a test of truth. For example:

• “Look at our missionaries.”
• “Look at our strong families.”
• “Look at the growth of the Church.”

But that’s not what Jesus is talking about.

Context is everything:

• Matthew 7:15–23 is a warning against false prophets—those who appear righteous but inwardly deceive.
• Jesus explicitly says in v. 22: “Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy… cast out demons… do many deeds of power in your name?’”—but He replies, “I never knew you.”
• In other words, external “fruit” can be deceptive. Success, charisma, growth, and even miracles are not proof of truth.

Jesus calls fruitfulness obedience to His Word, not institutional achievement or personal testimony. His standard is not “Do they look successful?” but “Do they do the will of My Father?”

Good Fruit Is Not Exclusive to One Group

The LDS Church often appeals to its moral code, strong families, and clean living as signs of truth. But:

• Many religious and even secular groups have admirable lifestyles.
• Jehovah’s Witnesses, Muslims, and even atheists can display kindness, discipline, and strong community values.

Fruit alone—especially external fruit—cannot determine doctrinal truth. False prophets can appear good, but only true teaching rooted in Christ produces lasting spiritual fruit.

Conclusion: Fruit Must Be Tested by the Root

Jesus did say that we will know them by their fruits—but He was warning against deception, not offering a blanket test for truth claims. Good fruit is not about church growth, reputation, or emotional affirmation—it’s about faithfulness to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The LDS Church appeals to visible fruit while promoting a false gospel—a gospel of restored priesthoods, proxy rituals, and a human prophet at the head. No amount of good appearance can cover doctrinal corruption.

The true church is recognized by the fruit that flows from the true gospel—the saving grace of Jesus Christ, rightly preached, rightly believed, and rightly lived.

Debunking the “17 Points of the True Church”

The so-called “17 Points of the True Church” have been circulated for decades in LDS circles as a faith-promoting checklist. They are often accompanied by the story of a group of young men supposedly discovering the LDS Church by independently compiling these traits through Bible study. But this story has no verified origin and no historical credibility, and the list itself fails both biblical scrutiny and theological coherence.

Some Points Are True… But Not Unique

Several points—like Christ organizing the church, baptism by immersion, and a global missionary calling—are firmly biblical. However, these are not distinctive LDS traits. They are common to countless Bible-believing churches worldwide, including many with deep roots in Scripture and history.

Other Points Are Deeply Misleading or Heretical

Many of the “17 points” are built on:

• Proof-texts taken wildly out of context (e.g., Isaiah 45:13 on paid ministry)
• Doctrinal distortions (e.g., a bodily God, baptism for the dead)
• A denial of the Trinity
• An unbiblical view of apostasy and restoration

Several points—even those with a kernel of truth—impose LDS assumptions onto the text, using Scripture as a mirror to try to reflect what LDS theology already believes (very poorly, I might add) rather than letting Scripture speak on its own terms.

The most serious errors in the list are not mere technicalities—they are soul-threatening doctrines:

• A physical God who was once a man
• A redefinition of Jesus that breaks the Trinity
• A gospel of works, ordinances, and institutional loyalty
• A “restored” Church that presumes the failure of Christ Himself to preserve His people

These are not small issues. They are, biblically speaking, heresies.

The True Church According to Scripture

The true church is not defined by a checklist, a hierarchy, or a restored priesthood. It is defined by:

• Faith in the true Christ (John 17:3)
• Preaching the true gospel (Galatians 1:6–9)
• Obedience to Christ’s commands (Matthew 28:20)
• Submission to His Word and Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16–17; Romans 8:14)
• Fellowship with the body of believers across time and place (Ephesians 4:4–6)

Jesus Christ is the cornerstone of the church. His gospel is sufficient. His promises are trustworthy.