By: Michael Flournoy
My name is Michael Flournoy. I am a lifelong member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and I currently reside near Austin with my wife. I came to appreciate apologetics while serving my mission in the Anaheim California area, where I frequently had the opportunity to discuss theology with Evangelical scholars and pastors. I also played a part in starting three public LDS/Evangelical dialogues in Yorba Linda and Anaheim, and spoke to a few hundred Christians about Joseph Smith and The Book of Mormon during the initial event.
One thing I notice a lot while dealing with Protestants is a widespread, easily-made conclusion that Mormons aren’t Christian. As apologetics go, I think this is the most important subject a Latter-day Saint can focus on, and should serve as the starting point in any discussion between Mormons and other Christians. If we cannot prove that we really do believe in Jesus Christ then we cannot expect to be taken seriously by Evangelicals.
When Mormons are confronted with the question of our faith in Christ we typically exclaim, “Of course we believe in Christ! Are we not The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?” However, this assessment alone is not enough. It is commonly acknowledged that while Mormons do use the name of Christ, our interpretation of his nature is erroneous and therefore damning since the master himself said, “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent (John 17:3).” The debate on whether someone can truly be a Christian without a correct view of God is the only argument Evangelicals bring to the table that could potentially mean the difference between salvation and damnation for Latter-day Saints; for were every other doctrine of Mormonism proven false we might be called disillusioned and mistaken, but we would be Christian nonetheless.
I would point out, first of all, that the view that we have to comprehend God’s full nature is dangerous both for Mormons and other Christians. If it’s true then there are a lot of Christians who aren’t Christian, ridiculous as it sounds. My good Protestant friends are not ashamed to admit that the Trinity is complicated and they don’t understand it completely. So here’s the question: how much ignorance are we allowed to have before God decides not to give us his grace? Here’s why I ask: some Christians believe Melchezidek was Christ, some Christians describe the Trinity with modelistic analogies, some Christians believe God chose who would be saved before we were born, and others believe He’s the type to let us choose. A great many Christians I’ve been in discussions with have even said that the Trinity is “mysterious” and I’ve often wondered what Paul would say about that, in conjunction with what he taught at Mars hill in the Acts 17 when he said, “Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too supersticious. For as I passed by and beheld your devotions I found an alter with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.”
Now I’m not trying to be offensive in any way, and if I’ve come off that way I apologize. I am not trying to say that believing in the mysterious Trinity is the same as worshipping an unknown God, but what I do want to point out is that Paul makes it seem as though these men of Athens may have in fact been worshipping the one true God, even if they were doing it in ignorance. Look again at what he says, “Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.”
As a Mormon I admit that I do not believe the Trinity. However, I would not go so far as to say that Trinity believers are not Christian. I don’t have a problem believing that they have had powerful experiences with the Holy Spirit and that they have a real relationship with Jesus Christ. I don’t think the Bible teaches that you have to have this correct concept. In fact, the book of Matthew contains a passage which states the opposite: Wherefore all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto the children of men… And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him… (Mattew 12: 31-32).
Perhaps the Savior is more merciful than some of us care to believe. I believe that the same Jesus has revealed himself to both Protestants and Mormons despite our different views of him because it was never knowledge of Christ that saved, it has always been faith.
As Latter-day Saints, we do believe in Jesus Christ. We know he is our Savior and that he lives because the Father resurrected him from the dead. He is a giver of marvelous gifts. He knows the deepest desires of our hearts and is willing for us to achieve those things. I know that he is the way, the truth and the life, and there is no other name whereby we can be justified, or pronounced clean. I know these things because he has revealed himself to me, and I’m not alone. As far as us worshipping another Jesus, it’s not true. There is no ‘other Jesus’. The Bible proclaims that there is only one Lord, one faith, and one baptism, and therefore the Mormon Jesus, who is also the Jesus of Protestants and all who are willing to call on his holy name, is the one Lord capable of granting salvation.
I'm known as Zachtary on Google, but this is Samuel Richardson talking:
ReplyDeleteYour subject title, "Saving Power of the "Mormon Jesus"" brings to mind certain ideas not clarified in LDS/Evangelical discussions: When the evangelicals refer to "saving power," they're talking of of their definition. When the LDS respond, they're talking of their own definition. In my opinion, these are two separate types of salvation: Evangelical salvation is with Jesus, by performing no works. LDS salvation is with God the Father in Exaltation, through doing all we can to receive that reward.
Technically, both definitions are right. The LDS also believe that you can live with Jesus in His Kingdom (the Terrestrial) without doing works (by not being "valiant in the testimony of Jesus.") (See D&C 76:71-79, particularly v. 79). This would put us, by the evangelical definitions, in the running as a Christian organization. The issue of Trinity really cannot be used to define biblical Christianity, because this concept arose from the Nicene Creed, and not clearly from the Bible. The oneness of Jesus and the Father also cannot be used, as this, also is a product of the Nicene Creed. We, as LDS do believe that Jesus and the Father are one. We don't add words not in Bible by saying ". . . one corporeal body."
Evangelicals believe we don't give much power to the Atonement by saying we need works. But in light of what I said, we give it the same power by acknowledging that one can find Jesus by not doing any works.
What we can claim, though, is that we give the Atonement even more power than the rest of the world by saying we can become like God, and receive exaltation. But we have to acknowledge that such achievement would NOT be under our own power or merit, but only after "all we can do."
I believe Matthew 19:16-22 speaks of these two salvations. If the rich young ruler had walked away after Jesus' answer in vv. 18 and 19, we know he would have had a general salvation. But when he pressed for more, Jesus then said in v. 21 that if he wanted perfection and treasures in heaven, he would have to do some work and some sacrificing.