Jay gets some guff for his views on sin

[MikeWaters]

But I have to say, he has influenced my thinking. I have done a lot more thinking about what grace and the atonement really mean since Jay has shared his views.

I've realized that it is very frequent that Mormonism is couched by it's own members as being grace-secondary. And that's kind of interesting.

At the end of the day almost every Mormon believes that they ought to be doing good things, and avoiding sin. That's good and right.

But where I think grace comes in, and the lack of belief in it, is the guilt and frustration that we sometimes experience and witness in others.

Almost as if being Mormon is a big Franklin planner with a huge to-do list to cross off. And Jesus, after you die, is going to inspect your Franklin planner.

So I don't know if you're right Jay, but thanks for making me think about this topic.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

But I have to say, he has influenced my thinking. I have done a lot more thinking about what grace and the atonement really mean since Jay has shared his views.

I've realized that it is very frequent that Mormonism is couched by it's own members as being grace-secondary. And that's kind of interesting.

At the end of the day almost every Mormon believes that they ought to be doing good things, and avoiding sin. That's good and right.

But where I think grace comes in, and the lack of belief in it, is the guilt and frustration that we sometimes experience and witness in others.

Almost as if being Mormon is a big Franklin planner with a huge to-do list to cross off. And Jesus, after you die, is going to inspect your Franklin planner.

So I don't know if you're right Jay, but thanks for making me think about this topic.

Taking a Stephen Robinson class at BYU is what got me started thinking this way, but it takes years and years to really internalize it. I was raised by parents and church leaders who were good people but could beat Tex at his own game. I can be prickly in my presentation, so I don't expect to win everyone over immediately.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by jay santos

Taking a Stephen Robinson class at BYU is what got me started thinking this way, but it takes years and years to really internalize it. I was raised by parents and church leaders who were good people but could beat Tex at his own game. I can be prickly in my presentation, so I don't expect to win everyone over immediately.

I have long been an advocate that grace is undersold in LDS culture.

Or to put it less gracefully, your "psycho-analysis" of my position is total garbage. To return the favor: sounds like your analysis is just a projection on to me of a one-time or ongoing disagreement with how you were raised.

Also, for someone who understands the atonement so well, it's interesting you can't accept Mike's compliment without denigrating me.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by Tex

I have long been an advocate that grace is undersold in LDS culture.

Or to put it less gracefully, your "psycho-analysis" of my position is total garbage. To return the favor: sounds like your analysis is just a projection on to me of a one-time or ongoing disagreement with how you were raised.

Also, for someone who understands the atonement so well, it's interesting you can't accept Mike's compliment without denigrating me.

I envy you Tex. I wish I was the guy they all worked. I am so envious I have really thought about starting to post like I thought like you, so I could get some action.

[Archaea]

I must also admit Jay does get me thinking about the application of the atonement and the purpose of grace. I may not agree with Jay's position and his quoting of Robinson worries me, but it is interesting.

Traditional LDS views have appeared very rigid and unforgiving and traditional evangelical views have appeared to wishy-washy. My own views are a bit unclear at the moment, being scrutinized and subject to modification.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Tex

I have long been an advocate that grace is undersold in LDS culture.

Or to put it less gracefully, your "psycho-analysis" of my position is total garbage. To return the favor: sounds like your analysis is just a projection on to me of a one-time or ongoing disagreement with how you were raised.

Also, for someone who understands the atonement so well, it's interesting you can't accept Mike's compliment without denigrating me.

If you're comfortable with what I call your game, then you wouldn't take what I said as such an insult.

Also, your last sentence shows the paradigm you're in. Understanding = not sinning. Let go of that paradigm.

But you're right. I do give you some digs. My "prickly" admission was a weak attempt to admit fault. I acknowledge I am sinning when I'm trying to get under your skin. But it's a lot of fun. I'll try to repent, but I can't guarantee I will change right away.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I must also admit Jay does get me thinking about the application of the atonement and the purpose of grace. I may not agree with Jay's position and his quoting of Robinson worries me, but it is interesting.

Traditional LDS views have appeared very rigid and unforgiving and traditional evangelical views have appeared to wishy-washy. My own views are a bit unclear at the moment, being scrutinized and subject to modification.

Don't let Seattle's attack on Robinson's essay on church of the devil sway you. Read his stuff for yourself. Believing Christ and Following Christ are the books for general audience. How Wide the Divide is a great book on comparing LDS doctrine to Christian doctrine. I do wonder why he hasn't written anything for about ten years. Bob Millet is another voice saying the same stuff, and he's basically become the church's spokesman to the Christian community.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by jay santos

If you're comfortable with what I call your game, then you wouldn't take what I said as such an insult.

Also, your last sentence shows the paradigm you're in. Understanding = not sinning. Let go of that paradigm.

I don't think you've made a post yet that accurately restates or describes my view.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by jay santos

Don't let Seattle's attack on Robinson's essay on church of the devil sway you. Read his stuff for yourself. Believing Christ and Following Christ are the books for general audience. How Wide the Divide is a great book on comparing LDS doctrine to Christian doctrine. I do wonder why he hasn't written anything for about ten years. Bob Millet is another voice saying the same stuff, and he's basically become the church's spokesman to the Christian community.

I wonder if Robinson was asked not to write anymore by the 12. I could see them potentially getting worried that a non-GA was wielding more influrence that most GAs.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Adam

It is impossible Tex. Because you won't allow yourself to be understood because you refuse to commit yourself to a position far too often.

We have covered this ground before.

You refuse to hold a position with clarity and then complain when people don't understand you clearly. Your repeated claiming that others misunderstand your position is the proof of the thesis.

And Tex prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open their eyes, that they may see. (2 Kgs. 6: 17)