Interesting blog on Mormon treatment of grace

[aaronshaf]

But when it comes to grace/works LDS prophets and apostles make it clear that both are necessary.

I find this kind of language really unhelpful... sometimes even shallow, because it misses a big issue: In what sense are they necessary? Are works simply necessary as an evidence of the authenticity of one's faith, or are they also part of necessary prerequisite merit for receiving forgiveness and eternal life?

In other words, most everyone agrees that faith and works have a indispensable relationship, but the big issue is: What kind of relationship do they have?

"Each of us has been sent to earth by our Heavenly Father to merit eternal life" - Robert D. Hales, "Personal Revelation: The Teachings and Examples of the Prophets", October 2007 General Conference

"Thus, brothers and sisters, along with the great and free gift of the universal and personal resurrection there is also the personal possibility of meriting eternal life." - Neal A. Maxwell, “Apply the Atoning Blood of Christ” Ensign, Nov 1997, 22; message from October 1997 General Conference

Even with Mormonism's doctrine of necessary gracious opportunity and necessary gracious assistance, it is still a relentless merit system.

What popular LDS apostle and educator John Widtsoe wrote is still true:

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is in full opposition to any doctrine which does not require man, and provide him with the means, to earn his way daily, to earthly and heavenly joys."

http://www.mrm.org/topics/documents-...t-john-widtsoe

[woot]

The way I understood it was that Jesus is the advocate, and that in order to get past God's requirement of justice, we have to become worthy of Jesus' representation (becoming "one" with him, although I find such language more poetic than informative). Therefore, we need to only do enough to make Jesus willing to be our lawyer.

This isn't terribly helpful, however, as it only shifts the blame from God to Jesus. At least Mormons don't have to deal with God and Jesus being the same entity, I guess.

[PaloAltoCougar]

A minor sidepoint: the original German translation of the Book of Mormon used the word "trotz" rather than "nach" in this verse, and thus the scripture provided that we are saved "in spite of all we can do", rather than "after all we can do." This point would, of course, be far more significant if the translator had been working with the original plates, which I'm pretty sure he wasn't. Thus, at most, the translation probably reflected an evangelical bias, rather than genuine spiritual insight.

Although this was corrected several decades ago, it was brought up occasionally by some of the oldest German members.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by aaronshaf

I find this kind of language really unhelpful... sometimes even shallow, because it misses a big issue: In what sense are they necessary? Are works simply necessary as an evidence of the authenticity of one's faith, or are they also part of necessary prerequisite merit for receiving forgiveness and eternal life?

In other words, most everyone agrees that faith and works have a indispensable relationship, but the big issue is: What kind of relationship do they have?





Even with Mormonism's doctrine of necessary gracious opportunity and necessary gracious assistance, it is still a relentless merit system.

What popular LDS apostle and educator John Widtsoe wrote is still true:



http://www.mrm.org/topics/documents-...t-john-widtsoe

Quoting Widstoe: lame.

You're not interested in dialogue.

In what sense are works necessary?

Works are necessary as a prerequisite to qualify for saving grace. Grace also enables man to perform those works.

Not much to argue over. LDS view is certainly biblical.

[pelagius]

Originally Posted by jay santos

Not much to argue over.

I am sure Aaron is aware that Mormon theology regarding "Salvation" can be described in "Arminian" terms. Mormonism has the concept of prevenient grace. Virtually ever Mormon accepts some notion of prevenient grace but they are often just not aware of the theological language or why it would be important in a discussion of work vs grace. Mormon's take prevenient grace for granted in their discussion in the sense that it is implicit in all our discussion of salvation. Therefore, an outsider is likely to miss it and accuse us of promoting a "works" based system.

Aaron is really exploiting differences in vocabulary and emphasis rather than real fundamental differences in underlying theology. To be clear there are differences in theology but that is not what Aaron is exploiting here. His major complaint is easily observed not to be an issue at all if he would realize what is implicit in Mormon discussions of salvation.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by pelagius

Aaron is really exploiting differences in vocabulary and emphasis rather than real fundamental differences in underlying theology. To be clear there are differences in theology but that is not what Aaron is exploiting here. His major complaint is easily observed not to be an issue at all if he would realize what is implicit in Mormon discussions of salvation.

This describes very nearly every conversation I've had with born-agains on the topic. It inevitably devolves into a semantics argument, with said born-again insisting, "But this is an exact quote!" and "You don't even believe your own scriptures/prophets!"

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by pelagius

I am sure Aaron is aware that Mormon theology regarding "Salvation" can be described in "Arminian" terms. Mormonism has the concept of prevenient grace. Virtually ever Mormon accepts some notion of prevenient grace but they are often just not aware of the theological language or why it would be important in a discussion of work vs grace. Mormon's take prevenient grace for granted in their discussion in the sense that it is implicit in all our discussion of grace. Therefore, an outsider is likely to miss it and accuse us of promoting a "works" based system.

Aaron is really exploiting differences in vocabulary and emphasis rather than real fundamental differences in underlying theology. To be clear there are differences in theology but that is not what Aaron is exploiting here. His major complaint is easily observed not to be an issue at all if he would realize what is implicit in Mormon discussions of salvation.

Excellent, simply excellent.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Tex

This describes very nearly every conversation I've had with born-agains on the topic. It inevitably devolves into a semantics argument, with said born-again insisting, "But this is an exact quote!" and "You don't even believe your own scriptures/prophets!"

Few things are more annoying than someone outside of my faith lecturing me on what I believe.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by pelagius

I am sure Aaron is aware that Mormon theology regarding "Salvation" can be described in "Arminian" terms. Mormonism has the concept of prevenient grace. Virtually ever Mormon accepts some notion of prevenient grace but they are often just not aware of the theological language or why it would be important in a discussion of work vs grace. Mormon's take prevenient grace for granted in their discussion in the sense that it is implicit in all our discussion of grace. Therefore, an outsider is likely to miss it and accuse us of promoting a "works" based system.

Aaron is really exploiting differences in vocabulary and emphasis rather than real fundamental differences in underlying theology. To be clear there are differences in theology but that is not what Aaron is exploiting here. His major complaint is easily observed not to be an issue at all if he would realize what is implicit in Mormon discussions of salvation.

Prevenient grace. Is that the same concept of what I have referred to and heard others refer to in more common language as "enabling grace"?

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Few things are more annoying than someone outside of my faith lecturing me on what I believe.

Amen. And using quotes from more than 100 years ago that I've never heard or read in thousands of hours of church worship, study, and proselyting.

Word to the anti-Mormons. If I've never heard the quote, it's not because it's so super secret the Mormons in charge don't want me to hear it, it's because it's not important, non-binding, probably speculation, and probably wrong.