Clearly there are differences between Mormon and Christian thought. The question is how far apart are the two? This book is an attempt to answer that question and is rather quick read. Unfortunately this book draws some conclusions that the reader could never draw. The book is divided into four main sections each comprised of two main sections as well as a conclusion. This is all explained in the introduction. The four main sections are essentially the Doctrine of Revelation, Theology Proper (Doctrine of God), Christology (Doctrine of Christ), and Soteriology (Doctrine of Salvation). The differences and similarities are summed up in a final conclusion that is in list format.This list is to say the least shocking, and I believe it would be to both evangelicals as well as latter day saints. So for this review I will essentially start there and work our way back to the other chapters. The first conclusion that the book comes to is that both Christians and Latter Day Saints believe that "The Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit are one Eternal God."1 In theory everything looks kosher and if we don't define the term "one Eternal God" then no one will have any complaints. To be fair they do scratch below the surface in the text of the book however it seems the differences do not play into the conclusions. By this definition one could say that Latter Day Saints agree with Oneness Pentecostals or Christians with Jehovah's Witness', clearly not the case. Even a Hindu could say they believe the same thing.
The Latter Day Saint belief about the oneness of God is limited to an oneness of mind and purpose. Dr. Robinson quickly will throw power and glory into this equation but due to his subordination view of Christ to the Father2 such a view cannot be truthful. The Evangelical view is that God is Ontologically one, that is His being is one. Thus, while the statement makes a big "bang" in the see were really not that different, if we define the terms we see we are really miles apart.
The second view that we supposedly have in common is that "Jesus Christ is Lord. He is both the Son of God and God the Son."3 Again if words have no meaning the of course this looks fine and dandy and both Evangelicals and Latter Day Saints would affirm this. However if we were to look at definitions of who Jesus is, we would see that the Latter Day Saint belief and the Evangelical belief are radically different. The Latter Day Saint belief is that God the Son is a literal Son, through sexual acts, of God the Father and Mary.4 Evangelicals on the other hand believe that Christ was formed in the womb of Mary by God through the power of the Holy Spirit, not through a physical act.
Number four was of particular interest to me because it dealt with the atonement. "Jesus Christ suffered, bled and died on the cross as a substitutionary atonement for the sins of the world."5 This one is simply interesting because with two radically different views of heaven I am not sure that a Latter Day Saint can agree to this. The concept of substitutionary atonement would mean that Christ is your substitute when it comes to your sins. However with the Latter Day Saint view of a three tiered view of Heaven6 true substitution is not possible, or is at least contingent upon something. If true substitution happened then even the sins of unbelief, disbelief, or more importantly in Latter Day Saint thought, not preserving to the end would be substituted from you to Jesus Christ. Thus all men would gain celestial Glory. Unfortunately this is not the case because the Latter Day Saint view of the atonement is very limited in it's power.
I could go on, and the book would have been good had the final two chapters not been written and the conclusions been left out for the reader to decide his or her own opinion of How close or "Wide the Divide." Over all I would not recommend this book to a new Christian or someone dealing with Mormonism for the First time, rather I would recommend Mormon America by Richard and Joan Ostling, The Gospel According to Joseph Smith by Ethan E. Harris, and Mormonism Explained by Andrew Jackson (Read it online) from the Christian Prospective and The Miracle of Forgiveness by Spencer W. Kimball, Mormon Doctrine by Bruce R. McConkie, or The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith by Joseph Fielding Smith from a Latter Day Saint prospective.
Footnotes:
1) Craig L. Blomberg, and Stephen E. Robinson. How Wide the Divide?: A Mormon & an Evangelical in Conversation. [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997], 195. - Return to text
2) Ibid., 130-1,8 - Return to text
3) Ibid., 195 - Return to text
4) Ibid., 139 - Return to text
5) Ibid., 195 - Return to text
6) Ibid., 149-51 - Return to text
2 comments:
I'm delighted that our now eleven-year-old book is still drawing attention. One of the advantages of reviewing a book that has been out for awhile is that one can monitor reaction to it in numerous venues should one choose to do so. Early on, there were many evangelicals who couldn't believe that Robinson was telling the truth or that, if he was, that he would long survive in LDS circles. Time has shown both of those concerns to be unfounded. A Mormon-evangelical dialogue of scholars and church leaders in both camps, of which I have been privileged to be a part from the inception, has met a couple dozen times over the last decade and we have achieved even greater agreement on controversial topics, yes, even after all terms have been carefully defined, than How Wide the Divide? reflects. Yet, at a grass roots level many of these developments are not yet widely known, though awareness is slowly spreading. Please pray that these encouraging developments would continue and some day reflect the official promulgations of the leadership of the church from the highest levels on down.
Dr. Blomberg,
Thank you for the comment. I never assumed that Dr. Robinson wouldn't survive in his conversations with Latter Day Saint friends or scholarship, rather it would appear that he and others like him compromise the Gospel by drawing connections many learned Evangelicals and many of my learned Latter Day Saint friends simply do not draw. Perhaps these are grass roots level people, well as grass roots as New York can get, but I have a different theory. These Latter Day Saint - Evangelical dialogues seem to be taking place with BYU professors on the LDS side and Christian professors on the Evangelical side, perhaps you were referring to Dr. Millet and Rev. Johnson, among others. However as you said in the introduction of the book you only represent your view on the Latter Day Saint Faith, and Dr. Millet can only represent his, not speak for your Church.
The differences between my Latter Day Saint friends seem to spring from two camps, we could possibly label them the BYU camp and the Salt Lake City camp. While I do like the direction the BYU camp is headed it, would seem to me my friends in the Salt Lake City camp have a stronger platform for their view being the more correct position within the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
As for continuing developments I would love to see a similar book done by someone in the First Presidency, an apostle, or even a seventy, and on the Evangelical side someone like James White, Bill McKeever, John Piper, John MacArthur, or R.C. Sproul, yet I fear such a work will never come to pass.
Again I would like to thank you for taking the time to comment on my little corner of the internet.
Matthew
Post a Comment