The Craziest Thing I Ever Heard . . .

[consiglieri]

I think most posters here know that I am an active Mormon who thinks the LDS Church has pretty much ignored Book of Mormon doctrine for many years by placing too strong an emphasis on works at the expense of grace in our salvation. (A trend I am glad to see being modified recently.)

Nevertheless, I heard the craziest thing the other day at the close of a religious radio program where the minister is trying to get listeners to say the "sinner's prayer."

I suppose it comes from believing both the Trinity as well as salvation by grace alone, but here is what he said, word for word:

God loves you so much that He died to give you the opportunity to ask Him to forgive you.

I am unable to defend such an extreme statement, but am more than willing to hear from anybody who thinks they can.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[gtaggart]

I think most posters here know that I am an active Mormon who thinks the LDS Church has pretty much ignored Book of Mormon doctrine for many years by placing too strong an emphasis on works at the expense of grace in our salvation. (A trend I am glad to see being modified recently.)

Nevertheless, I heard the craziest thing the other day at the close of a religious radio program where the minister is trying to get listeners to say the "sinner's prayer."

I suppose it comes from believing both the Trinity as well as salvation by grace alone, but here is what he said, word for word:

God loves you so much that He died to give you the opportunity to ask Him to forgive you.

I am unable to defend such an extreme statement, but am more than willing to hear from anybody who thinks they can.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Please Consiglieri, don't just assert. Give us some evidence to support your claims. And give us a range of dates. When, for example, did this "trend" start? A year ago? Five years? Ten? Twenty? Thirty? More?

And who in the LDS Church has been ignoring Book of Mormon doctrine. Name some names. Come on; I know you're up to it. Which of the apostles and prophets have ignored Book of Mormon doctrine?

[Zakuska]

Please Consiglieri, don't just assert. Give us some evidence to support your claims. And give us a range of dates. When, for example, did this "trend" start? A year ago? Five years? Ten? Twenty? Thirty? More?

And who in the LDS Church has been ignoring Book of Mormon doctrine. Name some names. Come on; I know you're up to it. Which of the apostles and prophets have ignored Book of Mormon doctrine?

"And the angel of the Lord said unto him, Why askest thou thus after my name, seeing it is secret?" --Judges 13:18

[DH]

I think most posters here know that I am an active Mormon who thinks the LDS Church has pretty much ignored Book of Mormon doctrine for many years by placing too strong an emphasis on works at the expense of grace in our salvation. (A trend I am glad to see being modified recently.)

I agree it is nice to see that trend being modified in recent years. When I was growing up in the Church, the emphasis always seemed to be on good works, virtually ignoring grace. While I understand that good works are necessary, and indeed are the only thing we have any degree of control over, if we ignore grace we run the risk of losing hope if we fall short (which we all inevitably do), and of hubris by thinking that we can "earn" exaltation by our own efforts. I get the impression the Church leaders realized this and subsequently started talking about grace more often in order to get us back on track.

God loves you so much that He died to give you the opportunity to ask Him to forgive you.

I am unable to defend such an extreme statement, but am more than willing to hear from anybody who thinks they can.

Yeah, that statement doesn't make sense to me, either. Why on earth would God have to die in order for us to ask Him to forgive us? (shaking my head in bewilderment)

DH

[TAO]

The quote is a bit off... it's more like 'he died so you could ask him for forgiveness (and receive it).

But apart from that, it doesn't seem all that weird.

[nicolasconnault]

I agree it is nice to see that trend being modified in recent years. When I was growing up in the Church, the emphasis always seemed to be on good works, virtually ignoring grace. While I understand that good works are necessary, and indeed are the only thing we have any degree of control over, if we ignore grace we run the risk of losing hope if we fall short (which we all inevitably do), and of hubris by thinking that we can "earn" exaltation by our own efforts. I get the impression the Church leaders realized this and subsequently started talking about grace more often in order to get us back on track.

I don't believe this "trend" (and other trends like it) comes from the Church leadership. I have observed Mormon "culture" growing and developing alongside revealed words from our leadership, and my conclusion is that they are two separate beasts, and that the leaders are well aware of it. There is plenty of unjustified superstition, intolerance and prejudice among Church members, all of which belongs to Mormon culture but not to Mormon doctrine. What we may perceive as a lack of emphasis from Church leaders, and which some unjustifiably call "ignoring doctrine", is merely a lack of understanding on the part of members.

After all, apart from what each member hears or reads from the bi-annual general conference and monthly message, members teach each other their own interpretations of these messages. Mormon culture is not made up of first-hand information directly communicated from the leaders to the general membership, but it is a compound of second- or third-hand information, filtered and modified through the members' idiosyncrasies.

[mercyngrace]

The quote is a bit off... it's more like 'he died so you could ask him for forgiveness (and receive it).

But apart from that, it doesn't seem all that weird.

Nah. I think it should be:

He died so that you could learn to forgive and thus be forgiven.

[ElderDarionBevan]

John 3:16, "God gave HIS SON" it wasn't god, it was his son who came so that all those who believed in him could recieve mercy because of their faith. James 2:17

[CV75]

God loves you so much that He died to give you the opportunity to ask Him to forgive you.

Is this understood by asking the question,

[TAO]

Nah. I think it should be:

He died so that you could learn to forgive and thus be forgiven.

agreed, that is even better.

[Let_Us_Reason]

John 3:16, "God gave HIS SON" it wasn't god, it was his son who came so that all those who believed in him could recieve mercy because of their faith. James 2:17

I don't get what you mean here that it wasn't god? Can you clarify?

Mosiah 15:1: "And now Abinadi said unto them: I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people."

[Libs]

I think most posters here know that I am an active Mormon who thinks the LDS Church has pretty much ignored Book of Mormon doctrine for many years by placing too strong an emphasis on works at the expense of grace in our salvation. (A trend I am glad to see being modified recently.)

Nevertheless, I heard the craziest thing the other day at the close of a religious radio program where the minister is trying to get listeners to say the "sinner's prayer."

I suppose it comes from believing both the Trinity as well as salvation by grace alone, but here is what he said, word for word:

God loves you so much that He died to give you the opportunity to ask Him to forgive you.

I am unable to defend such an extreme statement, but am more than willing to hear from anybody who thinks they can.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Hmmm, I think he simply meant that, without Christ's Atoning sacrifice, there would be no forgiveness. The sentence is kind of oddly structured, I think.

[Libs]

I think most posters here know that I am an active Mormon who thinks the LDS Church has pretty much ignored Book of Mormon doctrine for many years by placing too strong an emphasis on works at the expense of grace in our salvation. (A trend I am glad to see being modified recently.) -Consig

Actually, I didn't know that. My reading on this board has been kind of sporadic.

The Book of Mormon somewhat emphasizes "works", does it not? (And, I'm not making a judgment about that, one way or the other...just an observation). I've read the Book of Mormon several times, and it was my impression that it is works oriented. For what it's worth, I think the Old Testament is, as well. God withdraws his grace, when the people stop obeying his commands, and become iniquitous.

[why me]

John 3:16, "God gave HIS SON" it wasn't god, it was his son who came so that all those who believed in him could recieve mercy because of their faith. James 2:17

And faith without works is dead. Doesn't the bible state it as such?

[volgadon]

`

Actually, I didn't know that. My reading on this board has been kind of sporadic.

The Book of Mormon somewhat emphasizes "works", does it not? (And, I'm not making a judgment about that, one way or the other...just an observation). I've read the Book of Mormon several times, and it was my impression that it is works oriented. For what it's worth, I think the Old Testament is, as well. God withdraws his grace, when the people stop obeying his commands, and become iniquitous.

Which, with all due respect, boils down to a massive misunderstanding of what grace meant in both Old and New Testament times.

Grace wasn't a free gift with no strings attached, nor was it the antithesis of "works". Grace originally was a kinship term, and later became one of patronage also. grace meant the proper conduct among kin, or in a kinship theology (which is what covenants are). The chief kinsman would protect and provide for his kin. This was grace. Though they would rarely be able to repay the kinsman exactly what they were given (they usually could not, that was why they needed help) they were expected to do what they could. The kind of thing we would think of as works were actually termed graces!

[Lightbearer]

I think most posters here know that I am an active Mormon who thinks the LDS Church has pretty much ignored Book of Mormon doctrine for many years by placing too strong an emphasis on works at the expense of grace in our salvation. (A trend I am glad to see being modified recently.)

CFR-I would like to see from official sources (manuals, conference talks, etc) where this has ever been the case. This is an unfounded statement and a ridiculous one at that. I think you cannot even point to Elder McConkie (one of the favorite whipping boys around here) to prove such an assertion. Perhaps some members who have not read the Book of Mormon as they should may have brought this emphasis, but it has not been from the Church, or from the "evil" Correlation Committee either! The truth is, grace and works are not at odds of each other, only how the EV movement has twisted their meanings and placed them at odds with one another where no such dispute exists. The untemporate statement: "Christ did it all all we must do is believe," has made it necessary to remind people that faith is nonexistent where no righteousness or works is present. In fact the D&C teaches about the grace of God being the source of our salvation just as the Book of Mormon and all the scriptures do.

[ERayR]

The Book of Mormon somewhat emphasizes "works", does it not? (And, I'm not making a judgment about that, one way or the other...just an observation). I've read the Book of Mormon several times, and it was my impression that it is works oriented. For what it's worth, I think the Old Testament is, as well. God withdraws his grace, when the people stop obeying his commands, and become iniquitous.

No.

[Deborah]

I guess in all my years in the church I never really thought of grace and works in opposition. Grace has always been assumed and the reason works were emphasized is that we as church members are striving for something beyond salvation.

[consiglieri]

The truth is, grace and works are not at odds of each other,

Here I disagree with you, LB.

Grace and works are fundamentally at odds with each other, as Paul recognized (or whoever wrote Ephesians).

This is why the argument continues to surface on this board (and elsewhere) and religious disputants go round and round on the issue.

I am beginning to think that grace and works is no more easily understood intellectually than the Atonement which makes them operative.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[why me]

Here I disagree with you, LB.

Grace and works are fundamentally at odds with each other, as Paul recognized (or whoever wrote Ephesians).

This is why the argument continues to surface on this board (and elsewhere) and religious disputants go round and round on the issue.

I am beginning to think that grace and works is no more easily understood intellectually than the Atonement which makes them operative.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

I think that the problem is that the bible is in contradiction with itself. And perhaps that showed a major disagreement between Paul and James. Because James is quite clear that faith and works are linked together.

I think that evangelicals put it this way: if one believes in christ, one does good works naturally because one has the love of christ and one is a believer. I doubt that they would believe that all are saved regardless of works.

[ERayR]

I guess in all my years in the church I never really thought of grace and works in opposition. Grace has always been assumed and the reason works were emphasized is that we as church members are striving for something beyond salvation.

Me too. I have always known that grace was a given but that I must reach out and accept it.

[gtaggart]

Hmmm. Two CFRs, one from me and one from Lightbearer, and no response from Consiglieri. With this supposed "trend" being so recent, he should have no trouble giving us lots of examples to support his claim, right? And he should be able to give an approximate starting date, right?

[TAO]

I think the church is supposed to be works-oriented, that I do.

In D&C 22:3, it says:

For it is because of your dead works that I have caused this last covenant and this church to be built up unto me, even as in days of old.

To me, grace is the capability Jesus gives me to repent of my sins and obtain forgiveness. So I certainly believe in grace. But I also believe that works are a necessary part of the process - not that they redeem you - but that they are expected by Jesus, and thus you should do them. A good example of a work actually, is repenting. Repenting in and of itself is a work. It's something you do because Jesus commands you to.

Really, I don't even see a difference between faith, grace, and works - to me they are all part of one and the same towards doing what Jesus has commanded me, because I love him.

[Robert F. Smith]

Grace and works are fundamentally at odds with each other, as Paul recognized (or whoever wrote Ephesians).

This is why the argument continues to surface on this board (and elsewhere) and religious disputants go round and round on the issue.

I am beginning to think that grace and works is no more easily understood intellectually than the Atonement which makes them operative.

--Consiglieri

As Terryl Givens pointed out in his October 2009 Willes Center Lecture on the Book of Mormon, which is online at http://maxwellinstit...18&num=2&id=496 , the Book of Mormon was at one time very little read or studied within the Church. That there has been a slow change cannot be denied, but those of us who recognize it must be at least as old as Consiglieri.

As to faith & works, a good deal of confusion stems from the Protestantizing of the LDS Church due to the influx of lots of Protestant converts. They come from a former information environment in which the sovereignty of God (as omnipotent) conditions all other theological considerations (be they offhand or systematic), i.e., we poor, contingent humans are totally dependent on God for everything, even our very existence. Under such circumstances, there is nothing we can do to merit anything from Him. Hence His grace is our only out. This means that all Protestants are Calvinists at base, because they must logically be so. If someone is "saved," it is because he was chosen by God to be saved. If a reprobate, it was God's choice for Him. Good works are merely a sign of that election or selection by God, and of themselves have no value. Under such circumstances, mere humans have no independent existence and hence no free choice to either accept or reject the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

That is why Martin Luther rejected the Epistle of James. It conflicted with his view of the sovereignty of God. No room was left in Luther's mind for sacred oaths and covenants, nor for the coeternal nature and dignity of all humans. The notion that we were with God in the beginning, that we are all potentially of the genus and species of God, and that we all shouted for joy at the great Council in Heaven -- those who dissented being thrust out -- is beyond the purview of Luther and his successors, good and powerful men though they may be.

[WalkerW]

Here I disagree with you, LB.

Grace and works are fundamentally at odds with each other, as Paul recognized (or whoever wrote Ephesians).

No, they aren't. Grace was anciently part of a reciprocal system. "Works," as usually understood within Pauline contexts, are referring either specifically to works of the Mosaic law or that of a contractual system (i.e. wages or equal exchange). We have to move away from the Reformed terminology and definitions. We need to get back to the New Testament context.

EDIT: I see Volgadon beat me to it. Kinship and patronage: the contexts of Old and New Testament faith, grace, and works. Once again, I suggest reading my interfaith dialogue presentation.