Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rpn

Grace as taught (since 1990?)

Recommended Posts

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/865693681/Grace-is-not-a-Mormon-heresy-LDS-leaders-and-scholars-say-after-doctrinal-climate-change.html

I'm like the person in the article, don't recall every hearing or reading about Grace until Stephen Robinson's Believing Christ (1990, stunning), and it gave a powerful message.  I'm amazed that I didn't even know about the other contributions until this article.   But it leaves out the middle chapters of "In Quiet Desperation" which is the best IRL presentation of the Atonement I am familiar with.

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, rpn said:

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/865693681/Grace-is-not-a-Mormon-heresy-LDS-leaders-and-scholars-say-after-doctrinal-climate-change.html

I'm like the person in the article, don't recall every hearing or reading about Grace until Stephen Robinson's Believing Christ (1990, stunning), and it gave a powerful message.  I'm amazed that I didn't even know about the other contributions until this article.   But it leaves out the middle chapters of "In Quiet Desperation" which is the best IRL presentation of the Atonement I am familiar with.

Thanks, I've been commenting about how the culture is changing on this grace issue, and others have as well, yet for some reason I get push back from various people on this board in particular.  Nice to know that the Dnews agrees with me on this point.  :-)  

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, rpn said:

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/865693681/Grace-is-not-a-Mormon-heresy-LDS-leaders-and-scholars-say-after-doctrinal-climate-change.html

I'm like the person in the article, don't recall every hearing or reading about Grace until Stephen Robinson's Believing Christ (1990, stunning), and it gave a powerful message.  I'm amazed that I didn't even know about the other contributions until this article.   But it leaves out the middle chapters of "In Quiet Desperation" which is the best IRL presentation of the Atonement I am familiar with.

I don't blame the Church emphasis on good works, nor do I think the Church doesn't believe in grace.
But that said, I made it through decades in the Church without any measurable understanding of how the atonement works until I read Robinson's "Believing Christ".
That book completely changed my understanding of Christ's atonement.

But those that think Robinson and the Church agree with the protestant version of grace aren't paying very close attention.  One of may favorite statements from Robinson's book is "a pox on both their houses" describing the faith vs works debate.
As one of the commentators on the article said "You have given the LDS version of grace, but that is not the Protestant version of grace in any sense."

Edited by JLHPROF

Share this post


Link to post

I come from the camp that primarily what changed was the language we used not the theological content of our beliefs. While we'd occasionally use the term grace for the most part we attributed grace with cheap grace and tended to use the term spirit for the grace that helps us do what's right.

I did a post last night on this if anyone's interested. 

As for content, I think Mormons are closer to the eastern Christianity view of grace than we are to most Protestant kinds - although we share some features with Arminianism. 

Edited by clarkgoble

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I come from the camp that primarily what changed was the language we used not the theological content of our beliefs. While we'd occasionally use the term grace for the most part we attributed grace with cheap grace and tended to use the term spirit for the grace that helps us do what's right.

I did a post last night on this if anyone's interested. 

As for content, I think Mormons are closer to the eastern Christianity view of grace than we are to most Protestant kinds - although we share some features with Arminianism. 

I think it's along the same lines as correcting the use of the term "free agency" with "agency" or 'moral agency" over the years to better align with the actual theology.

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I think it's along the same lines as correcting the use of the term "free agency" with "agency" or 'moral agency" over the years to better align with the actual theology.

Yup. I think people too easily conflate terminology with theology.

Share this post


Link to post

This was me several years ago during a relief society lesson. The teacher was from the south, I don't know if that had anything to do with her message, but she mentioned putting all of our troubles at the Lord's feet and He will take them. I had a lightbulb moment. I'd never heard anything like it before. And in a round about way, it was Grace. I had a moment that Sheri Dew had below. 

"I can't even describe the effect it had on me," Dew said in an emotional moment in her keynote speech at the conference. "I had always been a believer. I absolutely had always known that Jesus was the Christ, but I think I'd had no idea what the Savior actually did for me. It opened my eyes to scriptures and divine promises I had never seen before, that the Lord would heal our wounded souls — boy, I was wounded — that he had already taken our pain upon him — I was in deep pain — and that he would succor us, or run to us, in our infirmities."

 

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

This was me several years ago during a relief society lesson. The teacher was from the south, I don't know if that had anything to do with her message, but she mentioned putting all of our troubles at the Lord's feet and He will take them. I had a lightbulb moment. I'd never heard anything like it before. And in a round about way, it was Grace. I had a moment that Sheri Dew had below. 

"I can't even describe the effect it had on me," Dew said in an emotional moment in her keynote speech at the conference. "I had always been a believer. I absolutely had always known that Jesus was the Christ, but I think I'd had no idea what the Savior actually did for me. It opened my eyes to scriptures and divine promises I had never seen before, that the Lord would heal our wounded souls — boy, I was wounded — that he had already taken our pain upon him — I was in deep pain — and that he would succor us, or run to us, in our infirmities."

 

This gave me goosebumps on the inside Tacenda  In a way, it brings to light the very essence of the sacrifice of Jesus to all of us...not just members of the church.  This concept is a hope all members should embrace.

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/6/2017 at 10:43 AM, rpn said:

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/865693681/Grace-is-not-a-Mormon-heresy-LDS-leaders-and-scholars-say-after-doctrinal-climate-change.html

I'm like the person in the article, don't recall every hearing or reading about Grace until Stephen Robinson's Believing Christ (1990, stunning), and it gave a powerful message.  I'm amazed that I didn't even know about the other contributions until this article.   But it leaves out the middle chapters of "In Quiet Desperation" which is the best IRL presentation of the Atonement I am familiar with.

 

On 12/6/2017 at 10:59 AM, hope_for_things said:

Thanks, I've been commenting about how the culture is changing on this grace issue, and others have as well, yet for some reason I get push back from various people on this board in particular.  Nice to know that the Dnews agrees with me on this point.  :-)  

I clearly remember the first time I heard Robinson’s BYU address with the “parable of the bicycle,” the talk on which his book was based. It was a memorable address, and I remember thinking how apt and ingenious his analogy was in teaching a gospel truth. 

But I have to say, as one reared in the Church, that the talk did not change the landscape for me or plow new ground in declaring doctrine that I didn’t already embrace and hadn’t embraced for a long time. 

My mental exclamation was not “wow, I didn’t realize that.” It was more along the lines of “well of course! That’s how it is.” 

So to declare or imply that the Mormon rank-and-file did not believe or accept what we do today on this subject muddles the facts a bit if not fictionalizing history to some extent. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/6/2017 at 11:52 AM, clarkgoble said:

I come from the camp that primarily what changed was the language we used not the theological content of our beliefs. While we'd occasionally use the term grace for the most part we attributed grace with cheap grace and tended to use the term spirit for the grace that helps us do what's right.

I did a post last night on this if anyone's interested. 

As for content, I think Mormons are closer to the eastern Christianity view of grace than we are to most Protestant kinds - although we share some features with Arminianism. 

Do you believe that the Holy Ghost and Christ's grace are the same thing then?

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Do you believe that the Holy Ghost and Christ's grace are the same thing then?

I think God's grace is often manifest via the Holy Ghost.  So I'm not making the reductive move of equating grace and the Holy Ghost. However I think that in this life often it's the transformative power of the Holy Ghost along with the witness of the spirit that is the sanctifying part of grace. That's not all there is to sanctification of course. A key part of sanctification is the resurrection to a Celestial body. But our ability to do what God asks as a practical matter is either directly due to the Holy Ghost or by aid from fellow people inspired by the Holy Ghost.

Where I think Mormons tend to differ with our Protestant friends (and perhaps to a far lesser extent our Catholic and Orthodox friends) is over the place of Justification. Outside of Justification and Sanctification the place of grace in overcoming the effects of the fall is a place we are similar to some Protestants of the Arminian tradition. Although I'd argue even there we differ from Arminians and even Orthodox.

Edited by clarkgoble

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

But our ability to do what God asks as a practical matter is either directly due to the Holy Ghost or by aid from fellow people inspired by the Holy Ghost.

 

I'm not sure if i agree or not, but that's an interesting way to look at it.

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I'm not sure if i agree or not, but that's an interesting way to look at it.

Again I should note I'm not being reductive. That's not all I think that's going on. But I think the combination of promptings of the spirit, gifts of the spirit, and indirect aid via others influenced by the spirit, explains a lot of how God empowers us. Now spirit in Mormon theology is pretty muddled so how that relates to the Holy Ghost is a bit theologically unclear. However in general I think it explains most of what we mean by sanctification in this life. Again this life is just a part of things though with the overcoming of death and the resurrection being key there.

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/12/2017 at 12:00 PM, clarkgoble said:

Again this life is just a part of things though with the overcoming of death and the resurrection being key there.

I would agree with your view of 'this life' (but as in mortal life).

Alma 12:24 - "... this life became a probationary state; a time to prepare to meet God; a time to prepare for that endless
state which has been spoken of by us, which is after the resurrection of the dead
."

Alma 34:32-33 - "For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the
day for men to perform their labors. And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore,
I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is
given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness
wherein there can be no labor performed
."

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, theplains said:

I would agree with your view of 'this life' (but as in mortal life).

Alma 12:24 - "... this life became a probationary state; a time to prepare to meet God; a time to prepare for that endless
state which has been spoken of by us, which is after the resurrection of the dead
."

Alma 34:32-33 - "For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the
day for men to perform their labors. And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore,
I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is
given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness
wherein there can be no labor performed
."

Alma clearly doesn't have all the doctrine that was later revealed. In Alma 40 Alma indicates that an angel told him about where souls go between death and the resurrection but the information about missionary work there apparently hadn't been revealed. So he didn't know about Christ going to spirit prison. With the extra information we know that one can repent even in spirit prison. So his probationary period extends to that time - something he wasn't aware of.

Edited by clarkgoble

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×