Mormon Neo-orthodoxy?
Have you noticed that Mormons are sounding more and more
like evangelical Christians? In the last few decades individuals inside the
Mormon Church, and many outside, have noticed a shift in the content and
presentation of the Mormon faith. Certain aspects of Mormon theology, like the
physical, limited nature of God, are either downplayed or left unsaid. Other
aspects, like salvation by faith in the justifying work of Jesus Christ, are
highlighted. Is something significant happening within Mormonism? Although
Mormon theology has been somewhat fluid over the decades, some feel that a new
band of Mormon scholars are indeed moving the religion in a new direction and
that Christians need to be aware of these changes if we are to have effective
dialogue with our Mormon neighbors.
Mormon sociologist Kendall White has been writing about this
change in Mormon thinking since the 1960’s. He writes that traditional Mormon
theology produced in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries by B. H.
Roberts, James Talmage, and John Widtsoe, centered on an “optimistic humanism,
finite theism, and [an] emphasis on human merit in attaining salvation.”{1} The
new movement, called neo-orthodox Mormonism by some, “stresses the omnipotence
and sovereignty of God, human sinfulness and inability to merit salvation, and
the necessity of salvation by grace.”{2} The primary theological sources for
neo-orthodox Mormons are the Bible and the Book of Mormon. The later writings
of Joseph Smith, including sections of the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of
Great Price, and the King Follett Discourse are seen as less helpful.
White argues that this theological trend is actually a
return to the earliest form of Mormon beliefs found in the 1830s. It’s
interesting to note that, while White admits that Mormon neo-orthodoxy is a
valid form of Mormonism, he’s not in favor of it. On the other hand, Robert
Millet, past dean of Religious Education at Brigham Young University, argues
that the neo-orthodox movement is a positive trend and more in line with the
teachings found in the Book of Mormon.
In the book The New Mormon Challenge evangelical
theologian Carl Mosser writes that neo-orthodox Mormons “promote an understanding
of the relationship between works and grace that is openly modeled after noted
evangelical pastor John MacArthur’s expositions of ‘Lordship salvation.’”{3} Mosser
also argues that it is these neo-orthodox Mormon writers and teachers who are
influencing typical Mormons today rather than those who support a more
traditional Mormon theology.
The result is a new Mormon synthesis that may cause the
traditional Christian to ask himself, Have the Mormons returned to the historic
orthodox Christian faith? In what follows we will highlight some of this new
Mormon theology in order to help the reader decide how orthodox neo-orthodox
Mormonism really is.
Recent Events and Historical Patterns
It was a bit of a shock recently when I discovered that Ravi
Zacharias, a highly respected Christian apologist, had addressed a mixed crowd
of Mormons and evangelicals at the Mormon Temple in Salt Lake City. Even more
interesting is the fact that after his hour long discussion on the exclusivity
of Christ, Zacharias received a standing ovation from the entire crowd. The
apologist was introduced by Dr. Richard Mouw, president of Fuller Seminary.
Dr. Mouw began his comments by saying “Let me state it clearly, We evangelicals
have sinned against you . . ." He added that not every evangelical has
sinned against Mormons, but he feels that too often we are guilty of
misrepresenting what most Mormons believe and ignoring their pleas when they
protest. He went on to argue that traditional Christians and Mormons have
enough in common to profit from a dialogue. He explained that, “when my good
friend [and Brigham Young University professor] Bob Millet says that his only
plea when he gets to heaven is 'the mercy and merit of Jesus Christ,' I want to
respond by saying with enthusiasm, 'Let's keep talking!’” Topped off with the
music of Michael Card, this was a unique event. It had been over 100 years
since the last evangelical spoke in the Temple; Dwight L. Moody preached there
in 1871.
When considering the traditionally negative view that
evangelical Christians have of Mormons, this kind of event can be difficult to
evaluate. Also challenging are the results of a recent George Barna survey that
found 26% of those Mormons that participated were classified as “born again” by
their responses. How can this be? Are all these Mormons being disingenuous
regarding their true beliefs? Part of the answer lies in the fact that at any
given moment there are more first generation converts within Mormonism than
there are second generation. Since Mormon evangelism is primarily aimed at the
Christian population, it is not surprising that many who attend Mormon worship
services have carried with them a more traditional theology and are often there
because of the youth programs and the accepting community that often exists
within Mormon Wards.
But another part of the explanation is a movement within
Mormon circles that began with the presidency of Ezra Taft Benson. It has
called Mormons back to their roots by focusing more on the Bible and the Book of
Mormon and away from the later writings of Joseph Smith. The leaders of this
movement have worked hard to distance themselves from the more speculative
thoughts and writings of past LDS authorities.
Many evangelicals are hoping that the Mormon Church will go
through something similar to the recent changes in the Reorganized Latter Day
Saints Church. This group was an early offshoot from the main LDS Church which
never did accept many of the later writings of Smith. In recent years, its
numbers have declined significantly because many have turned back towards a
traditional evangelical theology.
The Mormon Neo-Orthodox Movement
Stephen Robinson is professor of ancient Scripture at
Brigham Young University. He and Craig Blomberg, professor of New Testament at
Denver Seminary, co-wrote the book “How Wide the Divide” which explores both
the similarities and distance between evangelical and Mormon theology regarding
revelation, the nature of God, the person of Christ, and what one must do to be
saved. Robinson passionately implores evangelicals to not give into a
caricature of Mormon theology, one that few Mormons actually believe. He
argues that there are legitimate reasons for misunderstanding between Mormons
and evangelicals. They both use identical theological terms in different ways;
in fact the LDS Church as a whole lacks a sophisticated theological language.
Also, Mormonism’s lack of professional clergy, creeds, catechisms, or
theologians in the strict sense often contributes to the confusion.
In his book with Blomberg, Robinson complains that Mormons
are chastised because they take the Bible too literally, actually believing
everything in it that is written about God. He accuses evangelicals of
accepting second and third century explanations of biblical truth that are
dependent upon Greek philosophical thought rather than on what the Bible
actually says. Both Blomberg and Robinson agree that the two sides hold to a
very different description of God and humanity. But they also conclude that
many of our differences are found in areas where the Bible is silent and where
the Mormon canon has claimed to fill in the void with new revelation.
However, Robinson’s greatest concern is that evangelicals
take him and other Mormons seriously when they claim to believe certain things
to be true. For instance, Robinson believes that “through the atonement of
Christ, fallen humanity may be saved by accepting and obeying the gospel of
Jesus Christ.”{4} He also argues that Mormons believe in the God of the Bible,
“the Eternal Father, and in God’s Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.”{5}
He adds that they accept the biblical description of God as three and also one,
but not the post-New Testament attempts to explain how this can be reconciled.
It would be more than impolite to accuse Dr. Robinson of
being less that genuine when he personally claims to believe something.
However, he admits that there is much theological speculation within Mormon
circles and that it can be difficult to discover exactly what represents
official Mormon doctrine.
Let’s consider some specific examples of Dr. Robinson’s
beliefs and compare them to both traditional Mormon and Christian theology.
Robinson describes God as omniscient, omnipresent, infinite,
eternal, and unchangeable. However, he also believes that God and man are of
the same nature or species, and that God has a body of flesh and blood. He
denies that this constitutes a finite theism, a charge often attributed to
Mormons. Robinson also states that salvation is only acquired through grace by
faith in Jesus Christ. He argues at length that Mormons do not believe that one
can be justified by works in the eyes of a righteous and Holy God, but instead
that works follow justification and conversion. He attributes evangelical claims
that Mormons believe otherwise to confusion about Mormon terminology and a
deficient desire to really understand what Mormons teach.
How do these theological positions compare with traditional
Mormon thought? Is this a new or neo-orthodox Mormonism? Mormonism has always
held that God has attained his position via a path of eternal progression, and
comments to that effect by past Mormon leaders seem to conflict with Robinson’s
statements. For instance, when Mormon Apostle Orson Hyde said that God was
once a child who rose step by step to be where he is today, it appears to
contradict the idea of an unchangeable deity. Apostle John Widtsoe states the
issue even more plainly. He says that God “must now be engaged in progressive
development and infinite as God is, he must have been less powerful in the past
than he is today.”{6}
Robinson argues that there was once a time, before the
beginning of our creation, that God was human. But he adds that any speculation
about the events of that time is done so without support from the Bible or LDS
literature. Robinson is different from earlier Mormons in being unwilling to
speculate on how, or even when God rose from a finite human to an infinite God,
but he still believes that it happened.
Robinson’s beliefs about God are dramatically different from
traditional Christian, and I believe biblical, teachings. The Mormon god is
contingent or dependent on matter rather than its creator. He is finite in the
sense that there was a time when he was not God, no matter how long ago that
might have been. He is obviously not the First Cause or only self-existent
being. Even though Robinson refuses to speculate on the origin of God, Mormon
views imply that God is the offspring of other Gods, leading to polytheism
which the Bible calls idolatry. As God said through Isaiah long ago, “I am the
LORD, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God.”{7}
Are Mormons Christian?
Above we introduced ideas about salvation from the Mormon
scholar Dr. Stephen Robinson, professor of Ancient Scriptures at Brigham Young
University. He states that individuals are saved by accepting the gift God has
provided in his perfect Son, Jesus Christ. Robinson believes that “If humans
accept this gift and enter the gospel covenant by making Christ their Lord,
they are justified of their sins, not by their own works and merits, but by the
perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ accepted on their behalf.”{8} He admits
that the LDS Church is thoroughly Arminian, rejecting the Calvinist doctrine of
eternal security, but that this shouldn’t remove them from the sphere of
biblical Christianity.
While not doubting that Dr. Robinson believes all this to be
true, it is difficult to interpret Mormon doctrine in light of past statements
by Mormon leaders and in Mormon writings. For instance, how do we interpret
the Book of Mormon when it states “for we know that it is by grace we are
saved, after all we can do”?{9} Or when Joseph Smith writes “We believe that
through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the
laws and ordinances of the Gospel”?{10} Even more disconcerting are statements
made by Bruce McConkie, a popular Mormon writer. He writes that, “Repentance
is a gift from God conferred upon those who earn the right to receive it. It
comes by obedience to law.” And again, he writes, it is a gift “reserved for
those who abide the law that entitles them to receive it.”{11} These
statements point to an earned salvation based upon individuals fulfilling
legalistic obligations, the kind of religion that Paul condemns in the book of
Galatians.
Mormon teaching tools, such as the booklet Gospel
Principles, also make statements that appear to contradict a gospel of
grace. In a chapter titled “Freedom to Choose” the book states, “We began to
make choices as spirit children in our Heavenly Father’s presence. Our choices
there made us worthy to come to earth. Our heavenly Father wants us to grow in
faith, power, knowledge, wisdom, and all other good things. If we keep his
commandments and make right choices, we will learn and understand. We will
become like him.”{12} Not only does this teach that salvation depends on works
during this life, but also on works performed during a pre-existence as spirit
beings.
In spite of the recent changes in Mormon theology, a person
who holds to the full spectrum of Mormon teachings has a view of God,
salvation, and particularly the relationship between mankind and its creator,
that is radically different from what traditional Christians believe and what
we think the Bible teaches. This is not a reason to stop talking with Mormons;
in fact, it is why we need to continue to express the reasons for the hope that
we have in Christ.
Notes
1. Carl Mosser, The New Mormon Challenge, ed. By Francis Beckwith, Carl Mosser, and Paul Owen (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002) p. 78.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid., p. 79.
4. Blomberg and Robinson, How Wide the Divide (InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, IL., 1997) p. 16.
5. Ibid.
6. Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson, Mormonism 101 (Baker Books: Grand Rapids, MI, 2000) p. 28.
7. Isaiah 45:5
8. Blomberg and Robinson, 144.
9. 2 Nephi 25:23
10. Blomberg and Robinson, 177.
11. Ibid., 178.
12. Gospel Principles (Corporation of the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1979), p. 19.
© 2005 Probe Ministries
About the Author Don Closson received the B.S. in education from Southern Illinois University, the M.S. in educational administration from Illinois State University, and the M.A. in Biblical Studies from Dallas Theological Seminary. He served as a public school teacher and administrator before joining Probe Ministries as a research associate in the field of education. He is the general editor of Kids, Classrooms, and Contemporary Education.
What is Probe? Probe Ministries is a non-profit ministry whose mission is to assist the church in renewing the minds of believers with a Christian worldview and to equip the church to engage the world for Christ. Probe fulfills this mission through our Mind Games conferences for youth and adults, our 3-minute daily radio program, and our extensive Web site at www.probe.org. Further information about Probe's materials and ministry may be obtained by contacting us at: Probe Ministries 1900 Firman Drive, Suite 100 Richardson, TX 75081 (972) 480-0240 FAX (972) 644-9664
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
www.probe.org Copyright information
|