The gift of grace

[Calm]

By the way, a piano analogy for teaching grace is not unique to Bro. Wilcox.  Others have gone there before him.  But I see no reason to insist that he must have read their works instead of having it occur to him independently.

For those interested in a nonLDS adaptation that is, imo, very well done see:

http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/spiritual-formation-how-it-happen

Edited September 6, 2016 by Calm

[Calm]

And this is apparently a rather famous and quite beautiful piano analogy for teaching unity of fellowship through God:

"“Has it ever occurred to you that one hundred pianos all tuned to the same fork are automatically tuned to each other? They are of one accord by being tuned, not to each other, but to another standard to which each one must individually bow. So one hundred worshipers met together, each one looking away to Christ, are in heart nearer to each other than they could possibly be, were they to become 'unity' conscious and turn their eyes away from God to strive for closer fellowship.” 
― A.W. Tozer, The Pursuit of God"

CS Lewis uses a piano to teach about moral law:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/questionofgod/ownwords/mere1.html

Music can be a powerful metaphor.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Calm

[Vance]

That Christ has suffer for all is not new to LDS doctrine.

D&C 19: 15 Therefore I command you to repent—repent, lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth, and by my wrath, and by my anger, and your sufferings be sore—how sore you know not, how exquisite you know not, yea, how hard to bear you know not.

  16 For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent;

  17 But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I;

 

 

 

[Five Solas]

On 9/6/2016 at 0:15 PM, DBMormon said:

Mormonism has always stressed our works as "our part" to pay.  Uchtdorf changed the correlated game when he insisted that we do something out of appreciation and not out of something to contribute.  I welcome it shown in Correlated Mormonism that

- Our effort is only to show appreciation for the gift of the atonement.

- Christ paid the price in full with no part left for us to contribute to assist in redeeming ourselves.

- we are practicing here with no ability to be perfect in this life.  

-  Christ will be begging us to stay with him at judgement and not being graded based on our performance in this life.

- our willingness is all that counts and not our accomplishment.

- we have no coins to pay, it is finished.   He did it.  He did it all. 

-   he gave us our weakness and it is he who makes our weaknesses into strengths hence anything we accomplish above and beyond the natural man wasn't by our merits but 100% his and hence again there is nothing we can do but be willing and to try.  

- That we must be justified (made clean so as to stand at the judgement bar in God's presence), but also must be sanctified or changed (Christ's grace again gets all the credit) to stay there (in his presence) 

- That the law is designed to have us fail trying to keep it and in our failing it points us to Christ.  In other words the Law is designed to have us fall short and perceive we can't cut it trying to :Do all we can do" and in that failing we must look for a better way.  That way is Christ and his grace.  Hence we must begin a shift away from using accomplishment to measure ourselves and others and instead allow it to be about willingness and between that individual and God w/ no pressure to manipulate people into seeing accomplishment as the path to salvation.

We do not teach this.  We guilt and shame over falling short and guilt and shame people into doing more.  Mormonism focuses on outward behavior  Wilcox's paradigm calls for this to end. and to simply focus inward on one's willingness.  Any fruit from that is due to Christ's merits, mercy, and grace.  Not anything we did outwardly.  Again  God's grace gets any credit for anything we do above and beyond the natural man.

 

I grant this paradigm is in the scriptures but our leaders missed the mark generally and focused generally on works righteousness which is a false premise.

You may be making some excellent points here, DBMormon.  But I'm just not seeing it in Uchtdorf's actual words.  Your bullets seem to be your own paraphrasing (I've tried looking up a couple and I get nothing). 

Jesus paid it all.  Christ's "finished" work on the cross.  The wonderful exchange as Luther called it.  All this is Christianity, straight up.  But as I've told boblloyd91 and others, I don't think it's Mormonism.  In Mormonism, Jesus doesn't pay it all--he pays it some.  And while Uchtdorf may flirt with this line--I honestly don't see him ever crossing it. 

Can you help me (and perhaps other readers) close the gap?

--Erik

[waveslider]

2 hours ago, Five Solas said:

You may be making some excellent points here, DBMormon.  But I'm just not seeing it in Uchtdorf's actual words.  Your bullets seem to be your own paraphrasing (I've tried looking up a couple and I get nothing). 

Jesus paid it all.  Christ's "finished" work on the cross.  The wonderful exchange as Luther called it.  All this is Christianity, straight up.  But as I've told boblloyd91 and others, I don't think it's Mormonism.  In Mormonism, Jesus doesn't pay it all--he pays it some.  And while Uchtdorf may flirt with this line--I honestly don't see him ever crossing it. 

Can you help me (and perhaps other readers) close the gap?

--Erik

CFR where in Mormonism does it say, "Jesus doesn't pay it all--he pays it some."

[Five Solas]

6 minutes ago, waveslider said:

CFR where in Mormonism does it say, "Jesus doesn't pay it all--he pays it some."

Assuming you're not making a joke & I'm missing something--you could start with the Book of Mormon's 2 Nephi 25:23. 

You pay some, then he pays some, till the balance is settled.  Assuming yours was a truly good faith effort.  Was it?  Are you sure?

;0)

--Erik

[waveslider]

25 minutes ago, Five Solas said:

Assuming you're not making a joke & I'm missing something--you could start with the Book of Mormon's 2 Nephi 25:23. 

You pay some, then he pays some, till the balance is settled.  Assuming yours was a truly good faith effort.  Was it?  Are you sure?

;0)

--Erik

So you are saying that in this scripture reference the only way to define the word, "after," can only mean a time period of after we do our futile attempt at trying to earn our way to salvation that grace kicks in. Perhaps the word, "after," could mean, "next to," as in being guided by His grace while we are in the act of doing all that we can do to follow Him.

What about this:

"17  And moreover, I say unto you, that there shall be no other name given nor any other way nor means whereby salvation can come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent.
18  For behold he judgeth, and his judgment is just; and the infant perisheth not that dieth in his infancy; but men drink damnation to their own souls except they humble themselves and become as little children, and believe that salvation was, and is, and is to come, in and through the atoning blood of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent.
19  For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father."
Mosiah 3:17-19

This sure sounds quite the opposite of being able to earn our way into anything. An innocent child earns nothing because it doesn't even know right from wrong, It only knows how to love and follow it's parents, with pure trust and faith in them. Perhaps a change in understanding is in order as to why Christ said:

"....keep my commandments."
John 14:15

"If ye love me, keep my commandments."
John 14:15

He didn't say," If you want to earn your way, keep my commandments."

This is something that is taught in Mormonism.

You will have to do better than that in order to CFR. One misunderstood word in one scripture verse hardly shows that Mormonism teaches that the atonement is only a partial atonement.

[Anakin7]

A response by a LDS Sentinel Kryptonian Saint/Christian to this polemic of 2 Nephi 25:23 which has been responded to endlessly to be Christian and Biblical  - 

http://yorkshiretales.com/allaboutmormonism/page_shafovaloff_flunks_the_2_nephi_2523_test.html 

The Atonement It Is The Central Doctrine

Washing My Garment/Robe

In His Eternal Debt/Grace

Anakin7

 

Edited September 8, 2016 by Anakin7

[Five Solas]

6 hours ago, waveslider said:

...
You will have to do better than that in order to CFR. One misunderstood word in one scripture verse hardly shows that Mormonism teaches that the atonement is only a partial atonement.

Then consider heaven, as Christians understand it at its most elemental--eternal life with God (which Christians understand as Trinity--but let's set that aside for now).  For LDS, this eternal state exists in what they call "Celestial Kingdom" (lesser kingdoms exist and are governed by lesser deities). 

Would it be accurate to say Christ's work on the cross is sufficient for LDS to inherit their Celestial Kingdom and spend eternity with their "heavenly father?"  If the answer is no, you lose. 

--Erik

[stemelbow]

Mormonism is that all people save for some very rare few will be saved, will be blessed eternally.  It is true Mormonism has a space granted between death and judgment wherein prison or hell is alluded to.  But that is temporary. 

If it's true that all will be saved except for the very few exceptionally evil ones how are they so saved if not by Jesus' atonement? 

I honestly thought the traditional Christian perspective is that many will be saved but many will also suffer eternally.  That's not teaching that Christ paid it all, right? 

[Anakin7]

25 minutes ago, Anakin7 said:

A response by a LDS Sentinel Kryptonian Saint/Christian to this polemic of 2 Nephi 25:23 which has been responded to endlessly to be Christian and Biblical  - 

http://yorkshiretales.com/allaboutmormonism/page_shafovaloff_flunks_the_2_nephi_2523_test.html 

The Atonement It Is The Central Doctrine

Washing My Garment/Robe

In His Eternal Debt/Grace

Anakin7

Repost for Five Solas. Do you believe in once saved aways saved ?.

The Atonement It Is The Central Doctrine

Washing My Garment/Robe

In His Eternal Debt/Grace

Anakin7

Edited September 8, 2016 by Anakin7

[Five Solas]

23 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

...

I honestly thought the traditional Christian perspective is that many will be saved but many will also suffer eternally.  That's not teaching that Christ paid it all, right? 

Well, I certainly didn't intend to make an argument in favor of Universal Reconciliation...

:0)

--Erik

[stemelbow]

1 minute ago, Five Solas said:

Well, I certainly didn't intend to make an argument in favor of Universal Reconciliation...

:0)

--Erik

Then it seems wrong to claim Christ paid it all in full if not all are reconciled.  Unmerited favor doesn't even factor in. 

 

[Five Solas]

11 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Then it seems wrong to claim Christ paid it all in full if not all are reconciled.  Unmerited favor doesn't even factor in. 

 

It's an old argument, to be sure.

--Erik

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, Five Solas said:

It's an old argument, to be sure.

--Erik

Well I don't get what you're saying then.

Above you said, "Would it be accurate to say Christ's work on the cross is sufficient for LDS to inherit their Celestial Kingdom and spend eternity with their "heavenly father?"  If the answer is no, you lose."

Which seems like a weird complaint given the notion that Christ's work on the cross isn't sufficient for everyone to inherit the kingdom of Heaven, in your view.  Only some get to, right? 

[Five Solas]

3 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Well I don't get what you're saying then.

Above you said, "Would it be accurate to say Christ's work on the cross is sufficient for LDS to inherit their Celestial Kingdom and spend eternity with their "heavenly father?"  If the answer is no, you lose."

Which seems like a weird complaint given the notion that Christ's work on the cross isn't sufficient for everyone to inherit the kingdom of Heaven, in your view.  Only some get to, right? 

Completely fair.  I'll get back to this when I have more time.

--Erik

[Doctrine 612]

43 minutes ago, Anakin7 said:

Do you believe in once saved aways saved ?.

My neighbors are baptist and they teach this, after some time with them sharing this teaching I find that it is close to the "calling and election sure" teaching, my opinion of course.

 

[boblloyd91]

3 hours ago, stemelbow said:

Then it seems wrong to claim Christ paid it all in full if not all are reconciled.  Unmerited favor doesn't even factor in. 

 

I guess it depends on what soteriological paradigm you adhere to. If you're a TULIP Calvinist Christ died for the elect and only the elect, with the non elect damned. If you're an Arminian, you believe that Christ died for all but it is our choice to accept him or not, and receive those consequences for said choice. Finally, if you're a Universalist, Christ died for all and all will be saved. It 's interesting to me that Mormonism has aspects of all three models.

[boblloyd91]

I knew this thread would turn into a discussion like this, hence my snark in a post earlier. However it seems so far we are being fairly civil, which I like. I have a few more random thoughts about this based on the last several posts I'd like to add .I will order them and see what you all think.

1. I think it would be good to also consider Catholic and Orthodox views of grace, as well as that of the Early Church Fathers. I know we occasionally have Spammer and 3DOP show up to discuss their viewpoints, I wonder what they would think. I say this because their views from my understanding are fairly close to ours, where obedience is important and continuing in sin without repentance could lead to loss of salvation. Interestingly, i believe it was Terryl Givens who stated one of the ironies of the church is that we revere people like Luther and Calvin, when in fact we are much closer theologically to Catholicism and Orthodoxy in regards to the balance between faith and works. Also I am by no means an expert in Patristics, but from what I've read so far, they stressed the importance of keeping the commandments and obedience, and how works, while they may not save us, have merit in the eyes of God when he judges us. Like I said though I'm still reading them. I just finished reading about Polycarp and am going into Ignatius.
2. Along those lines, it would be good to study up on the New Perspective of Paul, which talks about Paul in his first century context, rather then in the context of the Reformation ( a Catholic poster lamented a while ago discussing this that it's inaccurate to call it a "new perspective" when it has been the belief of Catholicism and Orthodoxy for 2,000 years). A few years back there was a lively back and forth between N.T. Wright and John Piper. The disagreement was which context to look at when understanding Paul. First century Judaism or 1500's Europe. To me it's a no brainer, but to each their own.
3. While we are arguing about our respective views of grace and works (and judgement), I think we should compare the big picture of which is ultimately more merciful. Though Evangelicals get after us for saying we are "works based" I look at our belief of baptism for the dead, three kingdoms of glory, etc. as being much more kind and merciful then the binary view of heaven/hell which most Evangelicals subscribe to. Heck, if we want to go there let's compare LDS views of salvation to that of Calvinism, where predestination's logical conclusion is the arbitrary salvation and condemnation of people. I kind of get a kick out of Evangelicals who say how unkind our view of God is when in the end their's is much more cruel.  

[waveslider]

4 hours ago, Five Solas said:

Then consider heaven, as Christians understand it at its most elemental--eternal life with God (which Christians understand as Trinity--but let's set that aside for now).  For LDS, this eternal state exists in what they call "Celestial Kingdom" (lesser kingdoms exist and are governed by lesser deities). 

Would it be accurate to say Christ's work on the cross is sufficient for LDS to inherit their Celestial Kingdom and spend eternity with their "heavenly father?"  If the answer is no, you lose. 

--Erik

The answer is yes. The thing I think you are missing out on here is that all three kingdoms of God are part of His glory. They are not punishment. They are Heaven. The thing is, is that we remain the same person, even after death and resurrection, that we are now. We have our same goals, and dreams. We can in no way inherit any Kingdom, whether it is Telestial, Terrestrial, or Celestial, by earning our own way. We could obey every single commandment, once we learn of them and still never make it to the Celestial, or even the Telestial for that matter, without accepting the atonement of Christ. We don't follow the commandments to earn anything. We follow them to show our love for Heavenly Father, and Christ. We follow them because we want to become more like them, because they follow them. We want to learn how to think, talk, and act like them. This is the only way we will be able to learn these things. It isn't to earn a place, but just a pure expression of love and adoration. It is the actions of someone who has been born again, throwing away the natural man and instead taking on what God has commanded us to do who wish to follow Him.

What makes anyone think they would even want to be in God's presence if they are unwilling to try and be like Him. It would be more of a hell for them if they weren't like minded with God. Think of it like an alcoholic. If you take an alcoholic off the streets and bring him to church, and all he wants to do is go get another bottle of booze the whole time, do think he is going to be comfortable in church, among people who don't want to drink, but instead want to teach that drinking is wrong. Wouldn't the alcoholic's idea of an ideal place be in a bar, with an unlimited tab, which he never has to pay off. I feel it will be the same way for the people who want to accept the benefits of accepting Christ's atonement, but are unwilling to do as He has commanded. They won't want to be with those who aren't like them, they will rather be around what it is they prefer instead.

Again. I have never been taught that the atonement is only in part, as an LDS. Rather I have been taught to repent, take the sacrament, and show that I am willing to always have His Spirit to be with me, To take upon myself His name, which means to be His representative in all that I do. I was never taught to earn anything through obedience, but rather to be born again into someone who wants to think, talk and act like Him, and repent each and every time I falter and succumb to the weaknesses of my flesh. Isn't that what the gospel (goodnews) all about anyway? That we don't have to remain condemned because of our sins, which are nothing more than a failure to keep God's laws (commandments) in the first place? That we can forgiven and repent? Remember what Christ said to a sinner whom he forgave:

"10  When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11  She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."
John 8:10-11

Sin no more, not because she needs to earn anything, but because she now can be born again and can keep the commandments.

So you still haven't given a good CFR as to there only being a partial atonement, as opposed to an infinite and eternal atonement, as being taught in the LDS faith. The atonement gets us back into God's glory/heaven. To the place where we want to be, custom suited for our own particular needs, in the ultimate act of grace:

"In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you."
John 14:2
 

[Teancum]

5 hours ago, Five Solas said:

Then consider heaven, as Christians understand it at its most elemental--eternal life with God (which Christians understand as Trinity--but let's set that aside for now).  For LDS, this eternal state exists in what they call "Celestial Kingdom" (lesser kingdoms exist and are governed by lesser deities). 

Would it be accurate to say Christ's work on the cross is sufficient for LDS to inherit their Celestial Kingdom and spend eternity with their "heavenly father?"  If the answer is no, you lose. 

--Erik

I believe LDS can make a case through LDS scripture (D&C 20:1-38 and D&C 76, Article of Faith 3 and 4) as well as many BoM passages) that Justification will put one in the Celestial Kingdom at least at the lowest level of the Celestial Kingdom.  The main differences between a strict saved by grace only Christian and LDS is that there is the need for baptism and staying faithful in the saving covenant one makes at baptism.  Sanctification is what results in the higher rewards or higher levels in the Celestial kingdom... Crowns if you will, and that is where works and ordinances done in the LDS Temples come in.

Additionally Mormons do not believe in eternal security.  The D&C sections 20 verses I mention above make that clear.

Edited September 8, 2016 by Teancum

[boblloyd91]

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

I believe LDS can make a case through LDS scripture (D&C 20:1-38 and D&C 76, Article of Faith 3 and 4) as well as many BoM passages) that Justification will put one in the Celestial Kingdom at least at the lowest level of the Celestial Kingdom.  The main differences between a strict saved by grace only Christian and LDS is that there is the need for baptism and staying faithful in the saving covenant one makes at baptism.  Sanctification is what results in the higher rewards or higher levels in the Celestial kingdom... Crowns if you will, and that is where works and ordinances done in the LDS Temples come in.

Additionally Mormons do not believe in eternal security.  The D&C sections 20 verses I mention above make that clear.

Along with the D&C the New Testament has some things to say about that....see Hebrews 10 or 2 Peter 2 for example (referring to the loss of salvation). 

Edited September 9, 2016 by boblloyd91

[Vance]

10 hours ago, stemelbow said:

Well I don't get what you're saying then.

Above you said, "Would it be accurate to say Christ's work on the cross is sufficient for LDS to inherit their Celestial Kingdom and spend eternity with their "heavenly father?"  If the answer is no, you lose."

Which seems like a weird complaint given the notion that Christ's work on the cross isn't sufficient for everyone to inherit the kingdom of Heaven, in your view.  Only some get to, right? 

Excellent point.  If grace truly is ONLY unmerited, then how can God unjustly send anyone to endless torment?  By that definition, the vilest most evil person to ever live cannot be withheld from heaven.  If there is not anything that we can ever do to receive a greater salvational grace, then NONE can "deserve" heaven more than another.  Hitler is just as deserving as Five Solas.  The justice of God would then REQUIRE that Hitler receive as much salvational grace as Five Solas.

[Vance]

6 hours ago, waveslider said:

 We could obey every single commandment, once we learn of them and still never make it to the Celestial, or even the Telestial for that matter, without accepting the atonement of Christ.

Technically, I don't think that is true.  For Christ did EXACTLY that, and we know where He ended up.

[Vance]

18 hours ago, Five Solas said:

Assuming you're not making a joke & I'm missing something--you could start with the Book of Mormon's 2 Nephi 25:23. 

You pay some, then he pays some, till the balance is settled.  Assuming yours was a truly good faith effort.  Was it?  Are you sure?

;0)

--Erik

Actually the joke IS on you.

In addition to the verse I already posted showing you to be in error. There are also some like this one, which also is in our canon of scripture.

 

2 Cor  5:14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:

  15 And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.

. . .

19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.