Being a member of the LDS church and attending school in a baptist univeristy studying religion, I have to say Robinson does have the doctrine of justification and grace right. It all points to the doctrine which the church does teach in Romans and in 2 Nephi 10:24, “Wherefore, my beloved brethren, reconcile yourselves to the will of God, and not to the will of the devil and the flesh; and remember, after ye are reconciled unto God, that it is only in and through the grace of God that ye are saved.” Only the grace of God is one saved not by any other means, especially through goodworks (Ephesians 2:9).

Also in D&C 45:3-5 “Listen to him who is the advocate with the Father, who is pleading your cause before him—Saying: Father, behold the sufferings and death of him who did no sin, in whom thou wast well pleased; behold the blood of thy Son which was shed, the blood of him whom thou gavest that thyself might be glorified; Wherefore, Father, spare these my brethren that believe on my name, that they may come unto me and have everlasting life.” Only through Christ and believing him can one be saved. Do people in the LDS church really understand justification and grace? I doubt it. It’s not talked or tought in the church that much. We teach the atonement not the wrath of God or the justice which God holds over our heads on a daily basis because we are human and sin (Romans 3: 9-20).

The doctrine of justification has been the key topic in the history of the church for centuries. Martin Luther stated this doctrine was the “article of a standing or falling of the church.” John Calvin said something similar as Luther declaring it was “the main hinge on which religion turns.” Is this true with the LDS teaching of justification and grace? I believe it is. ONLY through the grace of Christ can one make it back to God. That is the point Robinson makes with the book. The Gospel of Christ is that through HIS GRACE we are saved. Grace is what Christ does which we cannot ever do for ourselves. He advocates our cause before God cleansing us because He met the demans of justice.

Robinson does a really good job of the topic of grace as well as justification. His perspective of the subject is right and doesnt deviate from the LDS doctrine of grace and justification.

Also of note is that John Taylor’s German Translation of the BoM states of 2Ne25:23 that we are saved “in spite” of all we can do.

Yes, definitely. I’ll be looking at all this when I come to Robinson’s discussion of 2 Nephi 25:23.

Lamoni (or, perhaps, Moroni, speaking through Lamoni), implicitly addressing Nephi’s “all we can do” statement, defines “all we can do” as “to repent of all our sins . . ., and to get God to take them away from our hearts.” Alma 24:11. Doing “all we can do” in other words, is not a lifetime of obedient drudgery with the distant hope of some far off future reward; doing “all we can do” is shifting our attitude, turning away from sin to accept salvation, to get God to take our sins away from our hearts. Doing “all we can do” is being born again.

Many, many thanks for these links. I was familiar with some, and entirely unfamiliar with others. These will be helpful for me.

I obviously have a fundamental misunderstanding of grace and will look forward to your future posts about it. I just wish I had discovered something like this years ago. Perhaps I would have never made so many mistakes and my wife would still be going to church.

I think the Church has moved in the direction of better understanding grace over the last few decades. That Deseret Book has finally retired Mormon Doctrine means that we may finally be able to get a more scriptural description of it.

As with Joe, I do not seek to impose a view upon the Brethren, but I do seek to have a discussion, so that members can learn to read the scriptures beyond one perspective.

One brief point of clarification: I don’t at all believe that “nothing has really changed in the Church as far as grace goes.” Indeed, if I believed that, I wouldn’t bother with these posts at all! The reason I think these posts worth doing is because (1) Believing Christ had a profound impact on teaching in the Church, but (2) I don’t think Robinson gets the specifically Mormon doctrine of grace right.

In other words, if people find it difficult to teach grace in the Church, it’s ultimately because efforts like those of Millet and Robinson don’t pay close enough attention to scripture, and because they therefore end up with unconvincing (and, I think, importantly wrong) interpretations of the doctrine of grace. That’s what I’ll be trying to spell out in this series.

I could be wrong, ( I am a lot) but the fact that Joe feels a need to discuss “Believing Christ” tells me (after all of these years) that nothing has really changed in the Church as far as grace goes. And in my opinion, until the leadership decides to change the way they teach grace (always couched in 2Nephi 25:23) nothing will change. To me, Joe is preaching to the choir here. Nothing wrong with that, but it will not change anything. Of course it could be, Joe does not see a need for change like I do. I got tired of getting verbally beat-up by the other churches in town because we believe that we have to earn our way to heaven. But, I do not have any kids left at home, so I just don’t care anymore.

As for the statement by Millet, I had told him about how I got into trouble in the Church by pushing for a change in the way we teach grace, and it was within that context that he said what he did.

Thank you for taking the time to talk to me about this. You have always been a pleasure to talk to.

Also, I wonder how much things have changed over the past two decades, with the rise of the internet, etc.

And, I would argue that wards and scripture are the fundamental units of the Church. The Prophet and General Authorities are wonderful in helping with issues of administration, organization, coordination, and leadership, but inasmuch as Brother Millet’s comment implies more than that, I’m very suspicious of it….

Yes, Robinson offers some clarifications in How Wide the Divide?, and I’m planning on drawing on them when we come to that part of the book. I’ll also offer some other points of caution we need to use in reading the parable.

As for “promoting grace,” I don’t know that I’ve ever done it—and I won’t be doing it in this series. I take as my task, here as elsewhere in my work in the Church, to clarify scripture. I don’t hear any authoritative message coming from Salt Lake City announcing that grace is non-scriptural, so I would guess I’m safe. The aim is never to push, but to open up.

I used to try and promote grace in my ward and stake, but long ago gave it up. I am happier now. Robert Millet gave me some good advice ,maybe ten years ago. He said, “it does not pay to get out ahead of the brethren.” We are not a bottom-up church. Until the President starts to teach something different, I do not expect things to change. So good luck Joe, heaven knows we need help, just be careful how hard you push this.

Burn out is a serious problem still in the Church. I know many members who still think they must earn their own salvation by working frenetically (like Robinson’s wife). A more serious problem is that each primary child can tell you that tithing is one dime out of a dollar, but many high priests cannot explain the spiritual ramifications of tithing in regards to consecration and exaltation.

We know the glow of the gospel, but not what is under the veneer. We’re skipping rocks across the top of the ocean, but not diving deep into its doctrinal waters to understand issues of faith, repentance, ordinances, Holy Ghost, etc. I look forward to your continued discussion here.