Honest question for my evangelical friends

[David T]

First of all, thanks, Rob, for responding.

I believe that the legal term of relevance here is "calls for speculation."

I recognize this, but I do think your thoughts on the matter are useful in having a dialogue on the subject. Thanks for indulging me.

In general, people who profess faith in Christ but live as if Christ doesn't matter to them probably aren't sincere. But that is a generalization and the realities can be far more complex. Since we lack middle knowledge (i.e., the knowledge of what would have happened if things were different), we don't know how people who profess faith in Christ but seem spiritually immature would have lived had they not professed faith in Christ at all. I knew a man, now deceased, whose manner of speech and behavior was rather "rough," and those who didn't know him well would probably have judged him not very spiritual. However, I know enough about his life history and spent enough time with him to know that for all his faults, his faith in Christ made a real difference in his life. Who knows what he would have been like without Christ. For that matter, who knows what I would be like. I'm certainly not the epitome of holiness. But (1) my standing before God is not based on what I do for God but on what God does for me in Christ, and (2) for all my failings I am aware of evidence that my Christian faith has made me a significantly different person.

I have observed much of the same thing, and agree with (and have experienced) your conclusions as well.

The Bible doesn't address in any specific or detailed way how God brings about our transformation from believing, partially holy individuals to completely holy, perfected individuals. However, I can find no basis for the notion of progression in spiritual development or personal holiness after death. What I do know is that we will be made spiritually and morally perfect (and physically perfect, too) in the resurrection. My best understanding, and I'm not sure I can be dogmatic on this, is that once a believer dies physically, he or she is completely freed from sin. This follows from the fact that the corruption of sin is effective through the classic biblical trio of spiritual enemies of holiness: the world, the flesh, and the devil. Those who have died in Christ are freed from these negative influences, and so I would assume that those believers will then be freed from all sin.

These are some implications I have gathered from what you wrote. Please let me know if they are accurate representations of your thoughts (or biblical interpretation), and if not, please correct that which needs correcting!

1. The created human spirit is essentially and originally good, pure, and pleasing to God.

2. Sinfulness is a state of corruption before God

3. To sin is the act which makes one sinful

4 A sinful nature is what causes one to sin

4a. Mortal flesh brings with it an essential sinful nature for those created in connection with such conditions.

4b. The state of living in a mortal world brings with it an essential sinful nature for those created in connection with such conditions.

4c. Living in a state where the devil has access to tempt you brings with it an essential sinful nature for those created in connection with such conditions.

3. Because the created human spirit is brought into being in the conditions of 4a, 4b, and 4c, while on the earth, mankind has within it from the beginning the essential nature of sinfulness

4. At death, 4a and 4b are removed as co-conditions of the human spirit

5. At death, the human spirit naturally remains subject to the influence of the devil, and thus remains sinful. Unless 6a.

6. Jesus Christ provided for a reversal of 4a in 4aa (Resurrected Body), 4b in 4bb (Living in the Heavenly World), and 4c in 4cc (Freedom from the Devil) for those who accept him.

6a. Acceptance of Christ then leads to the removal of 4c from the human condition

7. For those who die in the state of having accepted 6, and effected the removal of 4a, 4b, and 4c, the essential nature of the created human spirit is restored and freed, with no influences or elements of the sinful nature.

8. Because of the acceptance of Christ, the human spirit is not just restored, but additionally enhanced (exalted) beyond its essential nature due to 4aa, 4bb

Is this accurate?

I respect your right as an individual to believe whatever you believe, and to interpret LDS scripture any way you choose. However, I have to say that I don't agree that you have interpreted D&C 130 correctly, and I don't think most LDS leaders or teachers would agree with you, either. As I understand it, and as I see most LDS teachers explaining it, D&C 130:18-21 is a law to which everyone remains subject and has to do with how far each individual advances spiritually. The passage leaves no room, so far as I can see, for the explanation that Christ keeps that law on our behalf. That is a nice, evangelical-sounding way of explaining it, but it is not the customary LDS way of explaining it, and it doesn't fit the passage.

I was taking the principle of D&C 130, and applying it to the principles of Salvation. It appears the rest of my post, which explained what was meant by this, was un-addressed or misunderstood. It explains how the Atonement of Christ is what gives our actions value as 'merit'. the latter portion of the post is reproduced here with additional underlined emphases.:

Under Justification in the Covenant of Christ, our faults do not count against us as they would through the Raw Law of Justice. But through the Mercy of the Justification of Christ, the obedience that we do based on the grace given us in His name is counted to us as righteousness due to the grace of the merits of Christ working within us. Christ allows us to reap the benefits of our obedience that otherwise we would not deserve.

I will reference a 2006 conference talk by Elder Richard G. Scott, which I believe does a good job of placing this into context.

Each of us makes mistakes in life. They result in broken eternal laws. Justice is that part of Father in Heaven

[Rob Bowman]

Flyonthewall,

I have already posted earlier in this thread an overview of the evangelical doctrine of salvation, pointing out that it classically affirms past, present, and future aspects of salvation.

Your questions once again illustrate a serious problem, which is that Mormons routinely reason that if we don't have to keep the commandments to be saved, they must be "optional" and mere "suggestions." Let me offer an analogy (and like all analogies it has its limits). Our adopted child did not need to keep all of our family's house rules in order to become our child. In fact, we adopted her before she had any capacity to obey anything. However, obeying us as her parents is not "optional," and our house rules are not "suggestions." We expect her to abide by our rules, not in order to be our child, but because we are her parents and she is under our authority.

[Rob Bowman]

nackhadlow,

I don't have time for a point-by-point reply to your whole post. One thing that is missing or incorrect in your list of implications you drew about my position is that I don't view the human spirit as good without qualification. The human spirit as created is a good thing because God only creates good things, but as a result of Adam's fall all human beings are born with a sinful disposition that makes them morally and spiritually corrupt, including both flesh and spirit. That is why we need to be cleansed in both flesh and spirit (2 Cor. 7:1). In our "natural" state as a result of the Fall, all of us are spiritually dead (Eph. 2:1). In salvation, God regenerates sinners (i.e., they are "born again," born "of the Spirit," John 3:3-8 ) so that they are spiritually alive (see Rom. 8:10). Only those who are spiritually alive have the promise that when they die physically they will be freed from sin and its effects. The world, the flesh (=fallen human nature), and the devil continue to influence people, whether regenerate or not, as long as they live, but the regenerate have the capacity (and the responsibility) in Christ by the indwelling Holy Spirit to resist those influences and to grow in Christlikeness even during their mortal lives. They are able not to sin, but in this mortal life they will not be at the point where they are not able to sin. Unregenerate people can mimic such spiritual growth -- they can live very moral lives, be extremely devout and religiously active, etc. -- but they are not actually growing in Christ because they are not connected to Christ in a redemptive way. Since they are still dead in sin, their lives are still incorrigibly mired in sin (not necessarily overt immoral behavior, but certainly sin in relation to God). At physical death, the regenerate are freed from the world, the flesh, and the devil, and in the resurrection they are raised from the dead with immortal, glorious bodies of flesh and bones; furthermore, their whole being (body and soul, or flesh and spirit) is no longer constitutionally subject to temptation. They will be then not able to sin. That means, of course, that redeemed people in the consummation, in the resurrection, will not merely be restored to pre-Fall Adamic innocence, but will be gloriously better than Adam was at his earthly best.

You quoted a 2006 conference talk by Elder Richard G. Scott, but I think you missed something. Scott, like numerous other LDS leaders, affirms that we must earn our salvation. Immediately after the paragraph you quoted, Scott has this to say:

"The demands of justice for broken law can be satisfied through mercy, earned by your continual repentance and obedience to the laws of God. Such repentance and obedience are absolutely essential for the Atonement to work its complete miracle in your life. The Redeemer can settle your individual account with justice and grant forgiveness through the merciful path of your repentance. Through the Atonement you can live in a world where justice assures that you will retain what you earn by obedience. Through His mercy you can resolve the consequences of broken laws."

Scott goes on to argue, again as so many other LDS leaders have affirmed, that the grace of God simply makes up for our failings, as long as we have put forth our "best efforts" and done everything we can possibly do in the way of obedience:

"His mercy pays our debt to justice when we repent and obey Him. Since with even our best efforts to obey His teachings we will still fall short, because of His grace we will be 'saved, after all we can do'" (citing 2 Ne. 25:23).

You also quoted D&C 84:41, "But whoso breaketh this covenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come." You interpreted this to mean that as long as a person desires to obey Christ, he will attain individual salvation. However, I don't think this is quite correct. The point seems to be that those who break the covenant have no chance of restoration. You can argue from this text that those who simply fall into sin can be restored, in contrast to those who deliberately break the covenant and turn away from it, but that doesn't mean that all the priesthood-holder has to do to attain individual salvation is not deliberately walk away from his covenant. Rather, the standard LDS position seems to be that he must do everything he can, work as hard as he can, and be as obedient as he can, if he is to attain individual salvation.

[David T]

nackhadlow,

I don't have time for a point-by-point reply to your whole post. One thing that is missing or incorrect in your list of implications you drew about my position is that I don't view the human spirit as good without qualification. The human spirit as created is a good thing because God only creates good things, but as a result of Adam's fall all human beings are born with a sinful disposition that makes them morally and spiritually corrupt, including both flesh and spirit. That is why we need to be cleansed in both flesh and spirit (2 Cor. 7:1). In our "natural" state as a result of the Fall, all of us are spiritually dead (Eph. 2:1). In salvation, God regenerates sinners (i.e., they are "born again," born "of the Spirit," John 3:3- so that they are spiritually alive (see Rom. 8:10). Only those who are spiritually alive have the promise that when they die physically they will be freed from sin and its effects. The world, the flesh (=fallen human nature), and the devil continue to influence people, whether regenerate or not, as long as they live, but the regenerate have the capacity (and the responsibility) in Christ by the indwelling Holy Spirit to resist those influences and to grow in Christlikeness even during their mortal lives. They are able not to sin, but in this mortal life they will not be at the point where they are not able to sin.

Unregenerate people can mimic such spiritual growth -- they can live very moral lives, be extremely devout and religiously active, etc. -- but they are not actually growing in Christ because they are not connected to Christ in a redemptive way. Since they are still dead in sin, their lives are still incorrigibly mired in sin (not necessarily overt immoral behavior, but certainly sin in relation to God). At physical death, the regenerate are freed from the world, the flesh, and the devil, and in the resurrection they are raised from the dead with immortal, glorious bodies of flesh and bones; furthermore, their whole being (body and soul, or flesh and spirit) is no longer constitutionally subject to temptation. They will be then not able to sin. That means, of course, that redeemed people in the consummation, in the resurrection, will not merely be restored to pre-Fall Adamic innocence, but will be gloriously better than Adam was at his earthly best.

So it does seem that I got it quite right, with a few minor modifications:

1. The created human spirit is essentially and originally good, pure, and pleasing to God.

2. Sinfulness is a state of corruption before God, which gives one the capacity to Sin.

3. To sin is the act which makes one sinful

4 A sinful nature is what causes one to sin

4a. All Mortal flesh brings with it an essential sinful nature for those created in connection with such conditions.

4b. The state of living in a mortal world brings with it an essential sinful nature for those created in connection with such conditions.

4c. Living in a state where the devil has access to tempt you brings with it an essential sinful nature for those created in connection with such conditions.

3. Because of Adam's sin, the created human spirit is brought into being in the conditions of 4a, 4b, and 4c, while on the earth, mankind has within it from the beginning the essential nature of sinfulness

4. At death, 4a and 4b are removed as co-conditions of the human spirit

5. At death, the human spirit naturally remains subject to the influence of the devil, and thus remains sinful. Unless 6a.

6. Jesus Christ provided for a reversal of 4a in 4aa (Resurrected Body), 4b in 4bb (Living in the Heavenly World), and 4c in 4cc (Freedom from the Devil) for those who accept him.

6a. Acceptance of Christ then leads to the removal of 4c from the human condition

7. For those who die in the state of having accepted 6, and effected the removal of 4a, 4b, and 4c, the essential nature of the created human spirit is restored and freed, with no influences or elements of the sinful nature. They are no longer able to Sin.

8. Because of the acceptance of Christ, the human spirit is not just restored, but additionally enhanced (exalted) beyond its essential nature due to 4aa, 4bb

Is that more accurate?

You quoted a 2006 conference talk by Elder Richard G. Scott, but I think you missed something. Scott, like numerous other LDS leaders, affirms that we must earn our salvation. Immediately after the paragraph you quoted, Scott has this to say:

"The demands of justice for broken law can be satisfied through mercy, earned by your continual repentance and obedience to the laws of God. Such repentance and obedience are absolutely essential for the Atonement to work its complete miracle in your life. The Redeemer can settle your individual account with justice and grant forgiveness through the merciful path of your repentance. Through the Atonement you can live in a world where justice assures that you will retain what you earn by obedience. Through His mercy you can resolve the consequences of broken laws."

Please note the part I underlined. That is the substance of my point! Please read that in connection with my statements.

Scott goes on to argue, again as so many other LDS leaders have affirmed, that the grace of God simply makes up for our failings, as long as we have put forth our "best efforts" and done everything we can possibly do in the way of obedience:

"His mercy pays our debt to justice when we repent and obey Him. Since with even our best efforts to obey His teachings we will still fall short, because of His grace we will be 'saved, after all we can do'" (citing 2 Ne. 25:23).

I don't seem him saying that it 'simply' (which in context, I read you as intending 'merely' and 'only') makes up for our failings'. It does, however, further illustrate the effects of such grace.

You also quoted D&C 84:41, "But whoso breaketh this covenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come." You interpreted this to mean that as long as a person desires to obey Christ, he will attain individual salvation. However, I don't think this is quite correct. The point seems to be that those who break the covenant have no chance of restoration. You can argue from this text that those who simply fall into sin can be restored, in contrast to those who deliberately break the covenant and turn away from it, but that doesn't mean that all the priesthood-holder has to do to attain individual salvation is not deliberately walk away from his covenant. Rather, the standard LDS position seems to be that he must do everything he can, work as hard as he can, and be as obedient as he can, if he is to attain individual salvation.

Which is generally a manifestation of the desire. If one has a sincere desire, they do do all that they can, and each individual's capacity and visible manifestation thereon if different, based on their own unique circumstances. My best is not the same as someone's else's best. The covenants and ordinances are tools that empower us with the ability to increase the capacity of the nature of 'our best', and thus not only have greater joy in this life, but be of greater use to bettering the lives of our fellow man.

[Vance]

You also quoted D&C 84:41, "But whoso breaketh this covenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come." You interpreted this to mean that as long as a person desires to obey Christ, he will attain individual salvation.

Notice the part I highlighted.

However, I don't think this is quite correct.

Is this because you missed the part I highlighted?

The point seems to be that those who break the covenant have no chance of restoration.

Only if you totally disregard the part I highlighted.

You can argue from this text that those who simply fall into sin can be restored,. . .

Yes, if they have the desires to obey Christ, then they would repent and be restored.

. . . in contrast to those who deliberately break the covenant and turn away from it, . . .

AND never repent and return.

. . . but that doesn't mean that all the priesthood-holder has to do to attain individual salvation is not deliberately walk away from his covenant.

?????

The covenant is one of obedience. One of the commandments to be obeyed is to repent, which implies imperfections will occur.

Rather, the standard LDS position seems to be that he must do everything he can, work as hard as he can, and be as obedient as he can, if he is to attain individual salvation.

Actually, I would say that this is another Rob Bowman misrepresentation of the LDS position.

Being saved "AFTER all we can do" doesn't mean that we HAVE to do EVERYTHING we can do (or in other words, we have to be perfect in our ability) to be saved. To do so doesn't allow for imperfections.

Why is it that Anti-Mormons seem to always insist that our doctrine REQUIRES perfection when it clearly and plainly does NOT?

[cdowis]

Our adopted child did not need to keep all of our family's house rules in order to become our child. In fact, we adopted her before she had any capacity to obey anything. However, obeying us as her parents is not "optional," and our house rules are not "suggestions." We expect her to abide by our rules, not in order to be our child, but because we are her parents and she is under our authority.

I think our beliefs are very close, and sometimes it is a matter of how those beliefs are expressed.

How do you view Alma 41 on restoration in the spirit world, and chapter 42 on justice vs mercy.

[Flyonthewall]

Flyonthewall,

I have already posted earlier in this thread an overview of the evangelical doctrine of salvation, pointing out that it classically affirms past, present, and future aspects of salvation.

Your questions once again illustrate a serious problem, which is that Mormons routinely reason that if we don't have to keep the commandments to be saved, they must be "optional" and mere "suggestions." Let me offer an analogy (and like all analogies it has its limits). Our adopted child did not need to keep all of our family's house rules in order to become our child. In fact, we adopted her before she had any capacity to obey anything. However, obeying us as her parents is not "optional," and our house rules are not "suggestions." We expect her to abide by our rules, not in order to be our child, but because we are her parents and she is under our authority.

What I am pulling from your posts is that your concept of salvation is not much different than the LDS concept, you just like to dress it up differently.

You are right that your analogy has limitations.

Romans 8 states that those that are adopted are those that are led by the spirit, and to be led by the spirit, one must walk by the spirit. We absolutely do have the capacity to choose and to obey. How does one "walk" by the spirit? By obedience to the word of the Lord. What is the word of the Lord? At the very minimum, the commandments.

God will not adopt anyone that does not choose Him. How do we choose God? By exercising our faith in Him. What does it mean to exercise our faith? As James puts it, faith without works is dead.

If the obedience to the commandments is not required for salvation, then they are optional. How do you get around that?

I did not see an answer to my question about one's pursuit of holiness in this life. Does one have to pursue holiness in this life or not? If one does not pursue holiness, what else is acceptable?

[Lightbearer]

I agree that we must

[GingerRed]

We also differ from Rob's view that we are 'born sinners'...that is not so.

Our 2nd Article of Faith:

"We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression."

We believe we are all born with the 'light of Christ',clean and pure after leaving God's presence. We are born with the CAPACITY to sin. We CHOOSE to sin. We are not born that way. To say we are 'born sinners' takes away our free agency to choose good over evil. The natural man has this weakness to choose sin if they want to. And if we do choose to sin we can also choose to repent of that sin and do it no more. ( that doesn't mean we still don't make mistakes, mess up or fall away. That's what the Attonment is all about.

I see that a lot also, the some other faiths think we are gaining our 'own' salvation. That is false. And it's been explained how so over and over and over, but they still don't get it....

[Rob Bowman]

Vance,

You wrote:

Actually, I would say that this is another Rob Bowman misrepresentation of the LDS position. Being saved "AFTER all we can do" doesn't mean that we HAVE to do EVERYTHING we can do (or in other words, we have to be perfect in our ability) to be saved. To do so doesn't allow for imperfections. Why is it that Anti-Mormons seem to always insist that our doctrine REQUIRES perfection when it clearly and plainly does NOT?

Please. I never said that your doctrine requires "perfection." You are the one who is misrepresenting me -- again.

[Vance]

Please. I never said that your doctrine requires "perfection." You are the one who is misrepresenting me -- again.

Rob, Rob, Rob,

What you said was,

Rather, the standard LDS position seems to be that he must do everything he can, work as hard as he can, and be as obedient as he can, if he is to attain individual salvation.

And, as you should know (but maybe you don't) Paul taught,

1 Cor. 10:13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

So, according to the Bible, an individual can avoid ALL sin.

So yes, in a way, you are saying that it requires perfection.

And you are not the first to make such an accusation.

[Rob Bowman]

Vance,

You are putting things together in a way I didn't, to manufacture a misrepresentation of Mormonism I didn't make. Hey, you would make a great anti-Mormon!

There is, as you probably know, some basis in LDS thought for concluding that a person must attain perfection (in some sense) in order to attain individual salvation. But I didn't even go there. All I said was that LDS doctrine requires people to work as hard as they can and be as obedient as they can. I acknowledge that most Mormons affirm that even the best Saint makes mistakes.

[Rob Bowman]

GingerRed,

I didn't say that people are born sinners. I said they are born with a "sinful disposition," an inclination to sin. That doesn't relieve us of our responsibility for doing evil, because we do choose to follow that sinful inclination.

Think about it this way. Roughly 100 billion people have lived on the earth. Of these, only one, the Lord Jesus Christ, grew up and demonstrated himself to be a sinless human being. Now, that's terrible odds. Clearly, we are not born morally or spiritually neutral. If we were, we would expect that some of us would choose never to sin and some of us would sin. Instead, we find that everyone sins, again except for Jesus Christ. Something's obviously wrong with the human race.

If you flipped a coin a billion times and it came up heads only once, you would conclude that there was something wrong with that coin.

We also differ from Rob's view that we are 'born sinners'...that is not so.

Our 2nd Article of Faith:

"We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression."

We believe we are all born with the 'light of Christ',clean and pure after leaving God's presence. We are born with the CAPACITY to sin. We CHOOSE to sin. We are not born that way. To say we are 'born sinners' takes away our free agency to choose good over evil. The natural man has this weakness to choose sin if they want to. And if we do choose to sin we can also choose to repent of that sin and do it no more. ( that doesn't mean we still don't make mistakes, mess up or fall away. That's what the Attonment is all about.

I see that a lot also, the some other faiths think we are gaining our 'own' salvation. That is false. And it's been explained how so over and over and over, but they still don't get it....

[Vance]

You are putting things together in a way I did, to manufacture a misrepresentation of Mormonism I didn't make.

Did you or didn't you?

Please clarify.

Hey, you would make a great anti-Mormon!

Except, I would have to go from the true side of the argument to the false side.

There is, as you probably know, some basis in LDS thought for concluding that a person must attain perfection (in some sense) in order to attain individual salvation.

Only to those who don't understand.

So, yeah, people can misunderstand/misinterpret and get there.

But I didn't even go there.

Yes, you did by claiming that we HAVE to do ALL we can DO. THAT is the misunderstood/misinterpreted concept. And you are promoting it.

All I said was that LDS doctrine requires people to work as hard as they can and be as obedient as they can.

AGAIN, THAT is FALSE!!!

That is NOT what that scripture means!

This is ANOTHER CLASSIC example of you misunderstanding/misinterpreting OUR scripture and then declaring what it means, AND GETTING IT WRONG!!!

The scripture DOES NOT say, "for we know that it is by grace that we are saved (ONLY), after (we do) all we can do", but rather "for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do".

I acknowledge that most Mormons affirm that even the best Saint makes mistakes.

If by "mistakes" you mean "sins" then it is inconsistent with your (mis)interpretation/(mis)understanding of the concept.

[Thunderfire]

I didn't say that people are born sinners. I said they are born with a "sinful disposition," an inclination to sin. That doesn't relieve us of our responsibility for doing evil, because we do choose to follow that sinful inclination.

Hello Rob,

I understand your premise here and while I disagree, I want to offer something to consider. On the surface, there is little difference in saying someone is either born a sinner or with a sinful disposition. Both of these statements denotes someone being born an enemy of God. For that matter, having a "sinful disposition" in itself is a sin so we can say the person was in fact born a sinner!

In my opinion, we are born pure and innocent and incapable of sin. Yet due to the

[Rob Bowman]

Vance,

You wrote:

Did you or didn't you? Please clarify.

Oops, that was a verbal glitch. I have fixed it.

I have started a new thread on 2 Nephi 25:23.

[Vance]

You are putting things together in a way I didn't, to manufacture a misrepresentation of Mormonism I didn't make.

Just combining what you said with scripture that we both (should) know.

[David T]

A bump, to see if Rob saw my response to him.

[Rob Bowman]

Nackhadlow,

Your numbered summary is more accurate, yes.

With regard to Scott