Honest question for my evangelical friends

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

No, that would not be accurate. God saves me by his grace enacted in the atonement; thus, the atonement is the core element of what God does in the complex act of saving me. I do nothing to receive salvation except to accept the gift of God's grace in Christ.

This is fine and dandy. How does one accept the gift? And is not accepting the gift doing something?

Faith in Christ entails relinquishing any claim to merit eternal life in God's presence, now or ever, even in part. If you think you will be saved by doing your 40% or 60% or what-have-you and Jesus' atonement will make up the difference, then you are not really trusting in Christ to save you; you are not accepting the gift.

So if I believe that Christ will pick up the remainder that I can never do, that is not really trusting Christ? Really? You are not making much sense here Rob. For even you claimed that "if we have no works with our faith, our faith is not the right kind of faith that can save us."

Slight tangent.

That sounds a lot like what we believe. This even goes back to the parable of the sheep and the goats. The only reason the Goats were not saved is because they did not do certain things. Any way. I suspect that this will go round and round.

[Vance]

God saves me by his grace enacted in the atonement; thus, the atonement is the core element of what God does in the complex act of saving me.

How interesting! Can you provide a reference where the atonement is defined with the inclusion of grace? Chapter and verse would be fine.

(PS that is a CFR!)

I do nothing to receive salvation except to accept the gift of God's grace in Christ.

So, by your logic, it is your acceptance of the gift that saves you and not the atonement or the gift itself.

I don't agree with your logic. Maybe that is just me.

[yesucan2]

yesucan2,

Hello. You wrote:

Although exceptions can occur, someone appearing on the PTL program on TBN ought to be a warning sign; it certainly is no endorsement. I did some checking on Mr. Walters; he has a Master's degree and is a lecturer at San Jose State University, and has written one obscure book on the Didache (probably his Master's thesis) and that's about it.

Unfortunately, you don't mention any of the specific evidence he supposedly gave that the concept of one heaven and one hell is unbiblical, which makes it difficult to respond on substance.

For a biblical defense of the traditional view, I hope you don't mind if I mention my book Sense and Nonsense about Heaven and Hell (Zondervan, 2007).

This was a number of years ago so it's hard to remember exactly how he supported his thesis, but I remember part of it was that there are apparently varying concepts that are translated as hell in the Bible. His background and passion is early Christian literature so undoubtedly it was in part connected with his work in that regard.

What is your standard for "obscure", and how did you arrive at that characterization of his work, because you are unfamiliar with it? Even if his work is obscure, how is that relevant to its value or his credibility?

Unbiblical? Does that mean it was Biblical and somehow it became unbiblicized?

Why would you think that I would use the PTL program to endorse someone; I am a Mormon. There was nothing in my statement that would indicate that I meant for that to be emphasized in that manner.

Also, the fact that you point out that he has a Masters Degree comes off as derrogatory. I went to college for 4+ years; that means I butted heads with plenty of Ph.D.s, J.D.s, M.D.s etc. I learned early that a doctorate doesn't necessarily mean someone is too with it. I said Brent Walters was brilliant. The reason I know that is that I was around him enough to know that he is. The lack of a doctorate doesn't prove that someone is not credible. Being asked to appear on TBN is irrelevant to it as well.

The point is that he is a Christian. He had ties to those in a somewhat mainstream Christianity. He is not a Mormon nor does he have any ties to Mormonism(or at least he didn't at the time or prior-I asked him). He does not believe in the concept of one heaven one hell. I think that supports my thesis that not all Christians outside of Mormonism believe in the concept of one heaven one hell. In fact, in this case, one pretty dang smart one does not.

[UpperDarby]

I'm sorry, I have to go right now so I can't give my own commentary, but could somebody please address coolrok7's post, specifically where he quotes Romans 10: 8-9.

coolrok7 said:"Notice the following statement from the,

[coolrok7]

I'll comment. After all the threads on grace works, Mormons here still don

[Vance]

Thnx to all willing to respond to this post. I'm looking forward to reading your responses when I get home.

Most of us have learned, by experience, that it is a waste of time to respond to coolrok.

[Rob Bowman]

Bluebell,

I had written:

[Rob Bowman]

Vance, I had written:

[bluebell]

Bluebell,

I had written:

[Rob Bowman]

yesucan2,

There are two different Greek words that are translated "hell" in the King James Version (Gehenna and Hades), but this doesn't mean that there are two different Hells in the sense of two different final abodes of the wicked.

I don't wish to debate personalities, especially personalities I don't know. I agree that not having a PhD does not disqualify a person's knowledge (I'm still working on my PhD myself).

It is totally irrelevant that there are people outside Mormonism that believe in more than one heaven and one hell. I don't claim Mormons are the only people on the planet who say this. I claim that the Bible doesn't teach this. We should talk about what the Bible says, not what some guy you saw on TV said that you can't even recall with enough specifics to use as a clear argument to support your view from the Bible.

[Vance]

I have "chosen to activate" the atonement in my life by believing in Christ's atonement for my sins. I have obeyed the gospel by doing what it says: putting faith in Jesus Christ to save me.

Vance, I had written:

[coolrok7]

Vance, both Rob and I have been responding to the thread op (addressed to us as

[yesucan2]

yesucan2,

There are two different Greek words that are translated "hell" in the King James Version (Gehenna and Hades), but this doesn't mean that there are two different Hells in the sense of two different final abodes of the wicked.

I don't wish to debate personalities, especially personalities I don't know. I agree that not having a PhD does not disqualify a person's knowledge (I'm still working on my PhD myself).

It is totally irrelevant that there are people outside Mormonism that believe in more than one heaven and one hell. I don't claim Mormons are the only people on the planet who say this. I claim that the Bible doesn't teach this. We should talk about what the Bible says, not what some guy you saw on TV said that you can't even recall with enough specifics to use as a clear argument to support your view from the Bible.

Since you can't prove that the Bible doesn't teach that, it's only your opinion, and what matters is the real truth. Your superior intellect is not going to figure it out any more than thousands of years of the brightest minds of the philosophers that preceded you (Not being nasty. That's just the way it is)

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

So again, using the same logic on your beliefs that you used on ours, it isn't the atonement of Christ that saved you at all, but the "accept(ance of) the gift of God's grace in Christ" that saved you. Or worded it in another way, 'you are saved by the acceptance of the gift of God's grace in Christ' and NOT the atonement of Christ nor His grace.

Now, if you don't like using that logic on your beliefs, why do you use it on ours? Or is this another example of the double standards so commonly employed by anti-Mormons?

Interesting way of putting it. This, I think, is a reasonable interpretation if we were to use the logic Rob uses in telling us that we really are not saved buy the atonement but by our works.

[Rob Bowman]

Vance,

You claimed that I

[Rob Bowman]

Vance,

You wrote:

Well, rather than play in your muddy water (misinterpretation of Paul's writings), let's just get to the crux of the issue.

By all means, feel free to avoid the teaching of God's word.

You wrote:

You claim that because the article of faith says ". . . saved by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel" that we believe that the atonement isn't what saves us. And you do this in spite of the numerous scriptures that clearly show the necessity of the atonement in our salvation and also in spite of this scripture, (with which, I am sure you are familiar)....

Vance, please go find someone who understands logic and ask them to explain to you the difference between X being necessary for something and X actually accomplishing something.

[David T]

Rob, you're basing your argument against your personal interpretation and parsing of the Article of Faith in question that is not how the Church itself has taught and interpreted it, and rejecting what we say is our own belief. When we compare what we are saying to what you are saying (which is said in very much the same terms), you are creating a rift that does not exist, and becomes a matter of semantics. The principle is the same.

[Vance]

By all means, feel free to avoid the teaching of God's word.

I don't avoid the teachings of God's word, I immerse myself in them, I just avoid your false interpretations of the same.

Vance, please go find someone who understands logic and ask them to explain to you the difference between X being necessary for something and X actually accomplishing something.

LOL!!!

This is the best you can do?

The truth is your logic and double standards have caught up to you.

With your anti-Mormon blinders on, you have failed to see your own hypocrisy.

Let's go through YOUR logic again,

You said,

I have "chosen to activate" the atonement in my life by believing in Christ's atonement for my sins. I have obeyed the gospel by doing what it says: putting faith in Jesus Christ to save me.

So you are saved "by obedience to the gospel". Now the fact that what you believe is the "gospel" is not complete is irrelevant to our dispute.

You are claiming that because we believe we will be saved THROUGH THE ATONEMENT OF CHRIST, by obedience to the Gospel, that the atonement doesn't save us.

Yet you claim that you are saved by obeying the gospel (as you understand it), but somehow this is different, and somehow includes the atonement.

So, using a double standard, you are trying to exclude the atonement from LDS salvation while insisting that it is included in "your" salvation.

Please go find someone who understands English to explain to you what "through the Atonement of Christ" means.

[Rob Bowman]

Vance,

You're still not getting it, and your anti-evangelical blinders will probably keep you from getting it.

I am not saved by my obedience to the gospel. My obedience to the gospel is simply what happens (and must happen) from my side in order for the atonement of Christ to apply to me. But it is not a work I do in order to save myself. It is the response that the grace of God produces from me that brings me from darkness to light, from estrangement from God to reconciliation with God. It is fundamentally different from doing "works" in that it counts all my own efforts as rubbish and trusts exclusively in what God has done for me in Christ to save me (cf. Phil. 3:7-9). I don't even trust in my faith, but simply depend on God's mercy and grace in Christ. Mormon theology maintains that we are saved only if in addition to believing in Christ and his atonement we prove ourselves worthy by good works aplenty, including the performance of multiple religious rituals. I'm sorry you can't or won't see the difference, but there is a big one.

[Rob Bowman]

nackhadlow,

You wrote:

Rob, you're basing your argument against your personal interpretation and parsing of the Article of Faith in question that is not how the Church itself has taught and interpreted it, and rejecting what we say is our own belief. When we compare what we are saying to what you are saying (which is said in very much the same terms), you are creating a rift that does not exist, and becomes a matter of semantics. The principle is the same.

Your assertions here are too general to convince me of anything except that you disagree with me. If we are saying the same thing, why, for crying out loud, have your leaders repeatedly said that we are NOT saying the same thing, and in fact that evangelicals hold to a terrible false doctrine concerning salvation?

[JDave]

Rob,

There is a difference between LDS and Evangelical doctrines on grace&works, but it is not the difference you have been delineating.

A few questions to clarify your personal position: Will God save, via grace, somebody who has heard the gospel but does absolutely nothing with respect to it? In other words, will God save someone who believes that Christianity is possible, and neither denies it nor accepts it? Can someone do nothing, and still be saved through grace?

Also, will God save, via grace, everybody who does not actively and purposefully reject Christ?

[David T]

Rob, Let me explain again, in different, and then perhaps more personal terms.

The ordinances (all of them) have us symbolically walking in the footsteps of the life and ministry of the Savior, bringing His life to our remembrance, while being a token of a spiritual covenant which brings additional blessings as we place our will more in line with His. They teach us of the character of Christ, and of His attributes. They are guideposts which help us to see and recognize where we are. For those who have been properly taught, they bring hope. As we are striving earnestly to be like our Savior, our natural man gives way more and more to the working of the Holy Spirit within us. The changing of us into a new creature is a cooperative effort, and not done against our will. Obedience to the Lord is a way we submit our will to his, and allow the spirit to work, and to greater empower us.

While often characterized as a checklist of things we need to do to be saved, that really isn't accurate, although I understand why it can be viewed that way. The ordinances and level of our service are helpers and indicators of our own level of conversion.

When we are baptized, it is the beginning - it shows an acceptance of the belief and faith in in the ministry of Jesus Christ, that He Lives, and that He has personally restored His Church. It recognizes the authority of the Lord, and of His Kingdom. It is the covenant of Salvation - an act symbolizing the death of our old life, and new life as a child of Christ, subject to Him, and a pledge to obey him. The reception of the Gift of the Holy Ghost is an endowment of power that will spiritually cleanse us and do the work of sanctification in us as we align our will with the Lord's, and don't resist it.

The Sacrament is a pledge of allegiance to the Savior - renewing our vows that we may have broken, and allowing additional spiritual healing to do its work as we symbolically come back into communion with the Savior.

Temple Service, which emphasizes the necessity of the Atonement in our Salvation, takes us further into the role of the Savior, walking even further symbolically in the Savior's footsteps, covenanting to live even more like the Savior. It also enables us to participate in proxy work in the smallest degree in imitation of the Savior's great and infinite proxy work of Atonement. Our love and selfless service towards others is increased. Without Charity, the scriptures teach, we are nothing. Temple service helps us to be prepared to receive, in a very special way, the gift of Charity.

Rob, those of us who study the Gospel and live the Gospel do not view these as simple checkoff lists. They are guideposts which grant greater hope. Each ordinance and covenant, when emulated and followed, brings us by degrees closer to the Savior in heart and deed. As we do so, we become prepared to receive a greater measure of grace, and grow to the next level.

We can always know where we stand with the Lord. If we are currently faithful to our covenants (in mind and deed), we can see that the spirit has worked within us, and we are made aware of areas we desire to work on and pray specifically for help on to become more like our great Exemplar, recognizing that without the Atonement, we'd still be at the starting line. Not even there yet, actually. The ordinances are good, but not perfect indicators.

I grew up in an evangelical Church. My dad is still an evangelical minister. While still recognizing I have a long way to go, I recognize a much greater yearning and desire to be like my Savior now than I did before. I have a greater faith and reliance on the Lord in all that I do. I trust completely in the Atonement of Jesus Christ to save me. But I feel it would be a sign of complete disregard to the Savior if I did not obey what I have come to have a conviction of is His will and plan. Even when I falter, I don't worry about my salvation. I have complete hope in the redemptive work of the Atonement to cover my faults - but I desire to keep striving to be like my Savior, that I may be more effective in serving others.

You appear to make it seem like your belief is that our attempts to obey many ordinances and commandments shows that we do not have saving faith, because we do not rely solely on Christ's redemptive ability separate from our own actions.

I believe you when you say you do works of righteousness as a result of your love for the Savior and the acceptance of His grace, as a sign of his working within you. What I ask is that you believe the same of us when we say so, semantics aside.

Because of the work of the Lord in my life, I desire to continuously do as he asks me, believing that the additional empowerment I receive from doing so is a direct result of actively submitting my will to His degree by degree, causing the natural man to lose power by degree, and to more embrace the New Life in Christ. Our willingness and ability to receive and obey personal communication from the Lord in these regards is another sign of our progress.

It increases Faith.

It's been said that Abraham's obedience in his command to sacrifice Isaac was more because "Abraham needed to learn something about Abraham" - and I think that is a key reason for our need to heed the ordinances and commandments. They help us learn where we are, what we are willing to do, and sacrifice. It's easy to say, "I'd do anything for the Lord" when we are not asked much. But when we are, we see what we are really willing to do. We learn our degree of commitment, and what needs to be worked on to be more like the Savior here and now.

When we fully submit our will as the Savior did, and know it, we truly know him better than we ever could otherwise. This is my understanding of John 17:3, "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."

I think this aspect of how any why we live our lives as we do is largely ignored by our critics. It is viewed solely as a "Saved by Works, Saved by Grace" dichotomy, which it really isn't at all, and greatly belittles our faith and reliance on the Lord, and our desires and efforts to emulate Him.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I am not saved by my obedience to the gospel. My obedience to the gospel is simply what happens (and must happen) from my side in order for the atonement of Christ to apply to me. But it is not a work I do in order to save myself. It is the response that the grace of God produces from me that brings me from darkness to light, from estrangement from God to reconciliation with God. It is fundamentally different from doing "works" in that it counts all my own efforts as rubbish and trusts exclusively in what God has done for me in Christ to save me (cf. Phil. 3:7-9). I don't even trust in my faith, but simply depend on God's mercy and grace in Christ. Mormon theology maintains that we are saved only if in addition to believing in Christ and his atonement we prove ourselves worthy by good works aplenty, including the performance of multiple religious rituals.

Tell me Rob how do we prove ourselves worthy by good works? You think you understand LDS doctrine so well. Since no matter what we do, we cannot save our selves.

I'm sorry you can't or won't see the difference, but there is a big one.

Perhaps that is because there is nothing to see. You claim that you can't do anything on your end to be saved. Not that you claimed that exactly but you alluded to it. You make it sound that you cannot do any good works unless you are saved.

I think you are engaged in a sort of double speak. You claimed "I don't even trust in my faith, but simply depend on God's mercy and grace in Christ." How can you not even trust you faith but simply depend on God's mercy and grace? Is that not having faith or trust in Gods mercy and grace in Christ?

What must I do to be saved Rob? Can I still be Mormon? Or do I need to do something?

Nothing like a game of semantics. That is what this feels like. Forgive me of my weekness of writing.

[Vance]

Vance,

You're still not getting it, and your anti-evangelical blinders will probably keep you from getting it.

I am not saved by my obedience to the gospel. My obedience to the gospel is simply what happens (and must happen) from my side in order for the atonement of Christ to apply to me. But it is not a work I do in order to save myself. It is the response that the grace of God produces from me that brings me from darkness to light, from estrangement from God to reconciliation with God. It is fundamentally different from doing "works" in that it counts all my own efforts as rubbish and trusts exclusively in what God has done for me in Christ to save me (cf. Phil. 3:7-9). I don't even trust in my faith, but simply depend on God's mercy and grace in Christ. Mormon theology maintains that we are saved only if in addition to believing in Christ and his atonement we prove ourselves worthy by good works aplenty, including the performance of multiple religious rituals. I'm sorry you can't or won't see the difference, but there is a big one.

Rob,

You are still not getting it, and your anti-Mormon blinders continue to hide your hypocrisy from you.

Your "gospel" is that all you have to do to be saved is accept Christ. You have acknowledged your obedience to your "gospel" has saved you, therefore Christ's atonement is not what saved you but your obedience to your "gospel".

This is your logic applied uniformly. You don't like it applied to your faith, but hypocritically, insist that it be applied to the LDS faith only.

Now, for things that we can agree on.

My obedience to the gospel is simply what happens (and must happen) from my side in order for the atonement of Christ to apply to me.

Agreed.

But it is not a work I do in order to save myself.

Well, since I believe that it is impossible for me "to save myself" regardless of what I do, I, in a way, agree with this.

It is the response that the grace of God produces from me that brings me from darkness to light, from estrangement from God to reconciliation with God.

I disagree with this to some degree. It neglects this teaching of Jesus,

John 7:17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.

In short, obedience brings knowledge of doctrine.

It is fundamentally different from doing "works" in that it counts all my own efforts as rubbish and trusts exclusively in what God has done for me in Christ to save me (cf. Phil. 3:7-9).

The problem is that the works that are rubbish are the works of the wicked. The works of the obedient are not rubbish, but are rewarded by the fruits of the spirit.

Matt. 21:32 For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.

Luke 1: 15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,

How does one obey the truth? How does one obey unrightesousness?