There is an amusing scene in the 1990 film Back to the Future III in which time-traveler Marty McFly, exploring his home town in the year 2015, encounters a holographic projection of a shark as part of the marquee at a theater showing Jaws 19. At first taken by surprise, Marty recovers and comments, “The shark still looks fake.”
I must confess that I have a similar reaction to the latest “sequel” in the long-running debate over whether Mormons are or can be Christians, prompted this time around by the conservative TV talk-show host Glenn Beck. Do we really need to discuss this question again? Apparently we do, given the lack of clarity that continues to characterize much of what is said on the subject.
The Christian blogosphere recently lit up following the comments of World Magazine online columnist Andrée Seu in which she spoke of Beck not just as a Christian, but as “a new creation in Christ” who is “red hot” toward God. “I can say without hesitation that I have not heard the essentials of the gospel more clearly and boldly in any church than on his program.” Seu acknowledged that Beck is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and admitted that Mormon doctrine is problematic, but described Beck as a latter-day Apollos who needs a Priscilla and Aquila to help him with his theology.
Never Mind!
Evangelical bloggers were quick to contradict Seu. Justin Taylor, one of the most insightful Christians blogging today, commented on “Andrée Seu’s Tragic Mistake on the Gospel of Glenn Beck.” Taylor warned: “It is easy to be moved by talk of having faith in Jesus, without asking who the person understands Jesus to be…. Despite what mainline evangelicalism has taught for years, the gospel is not ‘I trusted in Jesus and he changed my life.’” Russell Moore, an astute Southern Baptist theologian, argued that evangelical enthusiasm for Beck’s religious rhetoric is a sign that American evangelicals have largely traded the gospel for American civil religion:
“It’s taken us a long time to get here, in this plummet from Francis Schaeffer to Glenn Beck. In order to be this gullible, American Christians have had to endure years of vacuous talk about undefined ‘revival’ and ‘turning America back to God’ that was less about anything uniquely Christian than about, at best, a generically theistic civil religion and, at worst, some partisan political movement.”
World Magazine acknowledged Taylor’s blog and offered a retraction, stating, “Our website editing system failed in regard to Andrée’s post about Glenn Beck.” In a separate article, the magazine’s editor-in-chief, Marvin Olasky, echoed Moore’s assessment: “Beck is syncretizing Mormon and Christian understanding in the service of a civil religion, but that’s a radically unequal yoking for reasons WORLD has pointed out before.”
One thing that seems to have been overlooked up to now is that Taylor and Moore offer two fundamentally different—and possibly incompatible—diagnoses of the problem. Both argue that evangelical enthusiasm for Beck reveals a lack of discernment and a shallow understanding of the gospel among American evangelicals. Taylor worries that Beck’s evangelical supporters are under the mistaken impression that anyone who claims that Jesus changed his life has accepted the gospel. Moore contends that those same evangelicals have mistaken American civil religion for the gospel. So which is it? Does Beck represent a personal-transformation gospel focused on Jesus as life-changer or a civil-religion gospel focused on a generic theism as the foundation for a stable society? I suppose it is possible to mix the two messages, and perhaps there are elements of both in Beck, but they don’t mesh naturally.
Mormon doctrine in two minutes
The main objection to viewing Beck as an advocate for the gospel is that the theology of the LDS Church, of which Beck is a member, is radically incompatible with the biblical gospel. The divide between biblical teaching and Mormon doctrine is so wide that from an evangelical perspective Mormonism falls outside the circle of acceptable, authentic expressions of the Christian faith. The crucial problems with LDS doctrine that impinge directly on one’s view of Jesus Christ and the gospel include the following unbiblical claims:
- All human beings preexisted in heaven, where they were the offspring of heavenly parents (God the Father and a “heavenly mother”), before their natural conception here on earth.
- Our Heavenly Father was a man who became a God—proving that we, too, can become gods.
- Jesus Christ is the “firstborn” of God’s billions of spirit children and the first of those children to become a God.
- As such, Christ is one of three Gods in the “Godhead,” as is the Holy Spirit, another of God’s spirit sons.
- Christ is the “Only Begotten,” which means that he is the only human being whom God the Father literally begat in the flesh. God is Jesus’ literal father in the flesh (allowing Jesus to “inherit” some divine powers other humans do not have) and Mary is his literal mother.
- Christ’s atonement guarantees immortal life in some heavenly kingdom to virtually all human beings, including those who willfully reject Christ.
- Christ (and God the Father) appeared to Joseph Smith to tell him to join none of the churches because all of them were wrong and their creeds were an abomination.
- Through Joseph Smith, God restored lost scriptures (e.g., the Book of Mormon) and inspired new ones (Doctrine & Covenants), from which Mormons learn the doctrines that set them apart from the rest of Christianity.
- Christ organized the only true Church in these latter days with a hierarchical system of “priesthood authority” required to teach or baptize others.
- Full forgiveness of sins and entrance into the highest heavenly kingdom, where God and Christ live, come to those who become members of the LDS Church, follow its teachings, and participate in its temple rituals, notably baptisms and other rites performed on behalf of the dead.
- The ultimate goal of the gospel and of LDS religion is to become gods, with the same powers and potential as the Heavenly Father.
You can find full documentation and discussion of these doctrinal problems in the LDS faith on the website of the Institute for Religious Research (IRR), where I am the director of research. In particular, we provide a thorough analysis of the doctrine taught in the LDS Church’s basic manual on doctrine, called Gospel Principles. Frankly, the evidence is overwhelming that the LDS understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ is radically different from that of the Bible.
“Mormons are not Christians”: Do they hear what we hear?
As I have already observed, these differences deal with such basic elements of Christianity that from an evangelical perspective we must conclude that Mormonism falls outside the boundaries of doctrinally authentic, theologically viable Christian faith. The usual shorthand way of making this point is to say that Mormons are not Christians. Unfortunately, what such a statement achieves in simplicity and rhetorical punch it loses in clarity and comprehension. What people hear when they are told that Mormons are not Christians may be any of the following:
1. “Mormons are not nice people.”
2. “Mormons are really part of another religion altogether, such as Hinduism.”
3. “Mormons are another entirely different religion by themselves.”
4. “Mormons are not saved from eternal condemnation.”
All four of these meanings are problematic.
(1) Many Mormons are very nice people indeed, so this statement is also objectively false, even assuming that it is ever appropriate to use the term Christian to mean a nice person.
(2) It is objectively false to classify Mormonism as part of another world religion, such as Hinduism. Regrettably, some Christians have actually tried to make the case that Mormonism is Hindu. Dave Hunt and Ed Decker, in their notorious book The God Makers (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1984), argued as much:
“Although it uses Christian language to disguise its paganism, Mormonism is less Christian than it is Hindu. The basic dilemma faced by every Mormon is a direct result of its Hindu roots” (60).
The claim that Mormonism has “Hindu roots” is historically false. Mormonism historically arose as a Christian heresy—a religious offshoot of Christianity that still retains a focus on Christ as its central religious figure, albeit reinterpreted in a thoroughly unbiblical way. The LDS religion has no historical or religious connection to Hinduism and rejects basic Hindu concepts (e.g., Mormonism rejects the worship of idols, pantheism, reincarnation, and karma). There are similarities between Hinduism and Mormonism (as there are between any two religions), such as a belief in a plurality of gods, but such comparisons are superficial because the similar-sounding affirmations have completely different meanings in the contexts of the two religious traditions.
(3) Others have argued that Mormonism is sui generis, that is, in a class by itself, sufficiently distinct from Christianity to be classified as a new world religion. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, suggests that instead of viewing Mormonism as a “Christian faith” we should classify it charitably as “the fourth Abrahamic faith.” That is, Land proposes that we view Mormonism as a religion stemming from the Abrahamic tradition alongside Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. This way of classifying Mormonism simply will not hold up. There is no more reason to classify Mormonism as a new Abrahamic faith than there is to so classify the Jehovah’s Witnesses, a Christian heresy as large or larger and as diffused throughout the world as Mormonism. Indeed, there are numerous sects of Christianity that distance themselves theologically and religiously from orthodox Christianity while insisting that theirs is the true Christian church; Mormonism is simply one among many such sects. Historical, religious, and theological comparisons demonstrate that the Mormon tradition (including both the LDS Church and its hundred-plus splinter sects) belong in the broader category of “restorationist” Christian movements that view themselves as the instrument of true Christianity today. These include Adventism and its offshoots, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Christadelphianism and other forms of so-called Biblical Unitarianism, Oneness Pentecostalism, the Sacred Name groups, The Way International and its offshoots, and the LDS Church and its offshoots, among others.
(4) It may well be argued that LDS doctrine and religion are so far removed from the biblical gospel that most Mormons will not believe the true gospel as long as they remain committed to LDS doctrine. However, this leaves plenty of room for a small fraction of LDS Church members to believe the biblical gospel in defiance or ignorance of their religion’s teachings. In any religion, there are always people who still consider themselves members but who are rethinking their beliefs or who are transitioning out of the religion. Many evangelicals who have come out of the LDS Church found saving faith in Christ before they removed themselves from the LDS membership rolls. Indeed, some retain their LDS membership, hoping eventually to bring their families and friends out with them. One could argue that such individuals are Mormons in name only, but again, there are people along a spectrum of situations from true-blue Mormons through pick-and-choose Mormons to Mormons in name only. The point is that unqualified generalizations about all Mormons are difficult to justify. And of course, we are not competent to judge the souls of other people, although we can make educated guesses as to their faith based on what we can observe.
A more nuanced statement of point (4) would be to say that we should presume that Mormons who accept and follow the LDS understanding of the gospel will be lost unless they repent and accept the biblical gospel (Eph. 2:1-10; Titus 3:4-7). Putting the matter this way recognizes the spiritually destructive effects of the false teachings of the LDS Church, while allowing for the fact that sometimes it is difficult to tell whether or to what extent a particular Mormon actually accepts (or understands) LDS doctrine. If this is the position that evangelicals should take—and I think it is—it becomes problematic to make the generalized, unqualified statement that Mormons are not Christians. That is, it is unlikely that anyone hearing “Mormons are not Christians” will understand this to carry the nuanced meaning “Mormons who follow the LDS understanding of the gospel are presumed lost.” If we want people to hear what we really mean, we must try to articulate our view more accurately, even if it loses some punch.
One might suppose that the problem can be avoided by saying that Mormonism is not Christian—that is, by punting on the question of whether Mormons are Christians and instead asserting only that the religion of Mormonism is itself not Christian. This may be something of an improvement, but the same sorts of problems remain. If Mormonism is not Christian, what is it? It is not part of another religion, nor is it a completely different religion.
Of course, from an evangelical theological perspective it can be even more misleading to say, without qualification, that Mormons are Christians, or that Mormonism is Christian. Such statements would seem erroneously to concede that the LDS Church is a legitimate denomination of Christianity, standing alongside those denominations and independent church bodies that affirm the essentials of the biblical gospel. I’m all for stating matters as generously as we can, but not at the expense of the truth of the gospel.
Considerations such as those just discussed are the reason why, for several years now, I have argued that we should view the question “Are Mormons Christians?” as unproductive at best and misleading at worst. The question assumes that we should give it an unqualified “Yes” or “No” answer, neither of which is fully satisfactory. About three years ago on this very blog I addressed this question at some length, arguing that the answer depends on how one defines the term Christian. (That blog post was lost due to technical issues, so I re-posted it about two years ago with some revisions at IRR’s blog, The Religious Researcher.) If by “Christians” one means all members of all of the religious groups that belong to the world-religions classification of Christianity, then of course in that generic sense Mormons are Christians, along with everyone else who claims to be. If one uses the term to denote persons who have been saved from eternal condemnation through their faith in Jesus Christ, then the best answer we can give is that most Mormons evidently are not Christians in that sense although some may be. Evangelicals would also have to hedge their answer if they were asked “Are Southern Baptists Christians?” or even “Are evangelicals Christians?” since not all Southern Baptists or evangelicals have genuinely come to saving faith in Christ. After all, basic to evangelical doctrine is the conviction that merely accepting evangelical doctrine, or associating oneself with an evangelical denomination, will not save anyone, since it is through personal faith or trust in Christ, not merely doctrinal correctness or the right religious affiliation, that God saves us.
To avoid overreaching, I have proposed that we make qualified statements that are defensible as objective statements of fact concerning the LDS faith. For example, we can state that Mormons are not orthodox Christians, or that LDS theology is heretical. Mormons will, of course, dispute our understanding of what is orthodox and what is heretical, but we can define these terms to convey an objective meaning. For example, we can stipulate that orthodox means in agreement with the major Christian doctrines articulated in the creeds from the first through the fifth centuries, while heretical means deviating from those doctrinal standards. We should, in short, make clear that while we acknowledge that Mormons sincerely regard themselves to be followers of Jesus Christ, we are convinced that the LDS religious tradition is at odds with the essentials of the Christian faith as taught in the Bible.
Back to Beck
The need for a more flexible and nuanced approach to the subject of whether Mormons are Christians is well illustrated with the example of Glenn Beck. Let me state categorically that I have absolutely no inkling or opinion as to the state of Beck’s soul or the genuineness of his faith in Christ. I have never met him, do not follow his program, and do not have enough information on which to base a conclusion. The fact that Beck is LDS is, of course, of great concern and creates a general presumption that he is in need of the biblical gospel of salvation. On the other hand, there does seem to be some evidence that Beck’s personal understanding of the gospel is at least far closer to the evangelical message than one would expect of a typical Mormon. Consider, for example, the assessment of Beck’s soteriology (doctrine of salvation) offered just a few weeks ago by Bill McKeever. McKeever is the director of Mormonism Research Ministry, an evangelical parachurch organization based in the Salt Lake City area, right in the heart of the Mormon culture. McKeever and his associates at MRM are far from “soft” on Mormonism. They regard it as a heretical distortion of Christianity, and they actively seek to help Christians share the true gospel with Mormons. McKeever recently wrote an article for his website on “The Not-So Mormon Soteriology of Glenn Beck” in which he quoted the following remarks made by Beck on his television program on July 13, 2010:
“You cannot earn your way into heaven. You can’t! There is no deed, no random act of kindness, no amount of money to spread around to others that earns you a trip to heaven. It can’t happen. It’s earned by God’s grace alone, by believing that Jesus died on the cross for you. This is what Christians believe…. I also am wise enough to know that people will say, yeah, but Glenn Beck is a Mormon, he’s not even a real Christian. You can believe what you want. I will tell you that I am a man who needed the atonement more than most people do. I appreciate the atonement. I accept Jesus as my Savior. I know that I am alive today because I did give all of it to Him because I couldn’t carry it anymore.”
McKeever, who wonders aloud if Beck’s “close relationships with several evangelical Christians are not having a positive effect,” concludes that “it seems apparent that Beck does not agree with traditional Mormon soteriology…. Whether or not he knows he is out of harmony with his church, I cannot say, but if I understand the above correctly, he most certainly is.” McKeever admits that Beck might mean something different from what his words mean to evangelicals, but he finds no reason to suspect that Beck is anything but sincere and straightforward.
The point, again, is not to argue that Beck is or is not a Christian in the sense of someone genuinely redeemed from sin through authentic faith in Jesus Christ. He may be, we may and should hope that he is or will be, and those of us who have opportunity to engage him or other Mormons like him should caringly present the biblical gospel without compromise. The point, rather, is that in the real world people’s beliefs and affiliations are not always consistent or cut-and-dried. Most people’s thinking reflects a mix of religious, philosophical, and cultural beliefs, values, and assumptions. Making blanket statements about whether the members of a particular group are or are not Christians mistakenly assumes a uniformity of belief within the group that in most cases is simply not there. Avoiding such statements will enhance our credibility with those whom we are seeking to reach with biblical truth. It will help to foster mutual respect and constructive dialogue with those who need to know what true Christianity really means.
238 replies to "ARE MORMONS CHRISTIANS 19: Glenn Beck and that Question Again"
Rob, I appreciate your very thoughtful blog. I certainly hope that Glenn Beck is an authentic, born-again Christian. I watch his show and like him. I do believe that God is working in and through his life. And pray that he will eventually leave LDS and become involved in a church that is truly orthodox and true to the faith that was “once for all delivered to the saints.” I found your blog very informative & thoughtful. Thanks.
I think this has become an even bigger problem that I thought, if someone like McKeever is giving credence to Beck as having a genuine Christian faith. Rob, while I agree with many of the things you said about Mormons, they are still a cult. A cult by definition is a distortion of the god they worship. A Christian cult is a group that distorts the theology proper of Who God is. The other distinctive of a cult is their use of phrases and terms similar to that of their parent beliefs but pour different meanings into them.
Therefore while Beck may sound similar to Christian soteriology, as long as he maintains that he is a Mormon he can’t mean the same thing, because the god and the faith that he relies on for his salvation is not the God that we Christians worship. As an analogy what if Beck uses all the same words that he does but replaced the word “Jesus” with “Buddha”, will that make him a Christian. Buddhists certainly don’t believe in heaven or salvation by grace. Essentially that is what Beck is doing, he is creating a set of orthodox doctrines around a false god.
The other problem is that most people like Beck. I like Beck, at least until he started talking so much about god. We want to give him a benefit of the doubt and even hope that a nationally popular celebrity like him would renounce Mormonism and embrace genuine Christian faith. What a coup that would be, right? The problem is that these wishful thinking people is underestimating the person they so admire. Beck is a very smart guy and well read. Why would you expect him not to know what he believes in? Why would you not expect him to not know that as a Mormon that Joseph Smith is their prophet and apostle? Why would you not expect him to know that Jesus was a separate creation from god the father? You can make the argument that many churchgoers in mainline Churches might not know what they believe and why they believe it, but I would give Beck much more credit and intelligence that that. He is suppose to be a man who prides on not accepting anything that anyone tells him but to research it himself and know what he is talking about. If so many people respect him for the information that he presents on the air 5 days a week, why do you presuppose that he has no idea what Mormonism is?
I would say that until you hear an explicit message from Beck that he has no idea what Mormonism means we should assume he knows exactly what it means to be a Mormon.
Anyone who has witnessed to Mormons will know that they think they are the true Church and everyone is an apostate. The danger with Beck is that he gives the further appearance that Mormonism is an acceptable branch of Christianity like any other denomination. The danger is not for those who are clear and well grounded in our faith but for those who might be new or searching, and because of Beck might get lured into Mormonism. Whatever good that you think Beck might be doing for this country, I would rather see America be run down to the ground and become a third world country and maintain the purity of the Gospel than to prosper and fall into apostasy.
While the assertion is made that Beck may not hold to Mormon soteriology it was not stated that he held to Christian soteriology either.
One of the statements from the LDS apologetics organization, Fair explains, ““By Grace We are Saved. The doctrine here stated is, salvation is freely given and cannot be “earned.” We find the same thought in the Doctrine and Covenants (6:13): “There is no gift greater than the gift of salvation.” And the Apostle Paul recognizes the difference between earnings and favors, when he says that the “wages of sin” is death, but the “gift” of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Rom. 6:23) We can earn death, but we must receive life as a gift, or not at all.” (George Reynolds and Janne M. Sjodahl, Commentary on the Book of Mormon, Volume 1, p. 379, edited and arranged by Philip C. Reynolds, Deseret Book Company, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1955)”
And the final sentence in the Fair link states (not the atonement language), “However, works are important and cannot be ignored. But works will not “earn” us the right to be in heaven. Since we accept the Biblical teaching of salvation, we accept the atonement of Christ.”
That article is actually arguing against faith alone, yet touts grace. So it seems the lack of clarity lies in the definitions of words. Words like grace, Jesus, atonement, God, etc. etc.
Rob,
Thoughtful piece on Glenn Beck. I think this is something that we should watch very carefully. It is true that Beck is surrounding himself with good evangelicals, but from time to time overt Mormon doctrine does appear on his show. IMHO, Beck is right with a lot of things he says about politics. But beware of his spiritual advice. Perhaps he does need a Priscilla and Aquilla.
Thanks for your thoughtful post, Rob. In my early 20s I dabbled in Mormonism (sadly due to poor teaching in the evangelical church I grew up in and because I admired the caliber of people in that world.) However, the one thing that your article fails to include is the way in which the “culture” within the Mormon Church affects each member attending. In my experience, it would be very difficult to be a gospel-driven Christian around your Mormon friends.
While sometimes Beck may say the right things (and so did many of my Mormon friends), their use of extrabiblical literature as scripture must be recognized as anti-Christian. Within the social culture of the Mormon Church, they have been told they are Christians, yet the evidence is in the words of their “scripture.”
I’ve heard Beck say things that shows to me he is strongly influenced by the Mormon Church — I’ve even heard him say to go out and do good works. Many statements are just “off.” But they are close enough for the average, uneducated “Christian” today to make assumptions that Beck understands the Christian gospel.
What is at stake here is the confusion within our own Christian circles. The ignorance of our own Christian community and the lack of sound teaching in our own backyard causes immature Christians to desire to include any “religion” as Christian just because they say they are Christian. If our congregations were taught the gospel each week, so that they could recognize a false religion, this discussion would not be so confusing to so many within our circles.
My time in Mormonism taught me a lot. Thankfully, it drove me straight into the arms of Jesus — the Jesus who is a part of the Trinity. And the one really good thing it did for me is that it gave me a passion to learn and study the things of God deeply. I’ve ended up in the Reformed camp due to wonderful teachers like Sproul, Horton, Ferguson, Packer…and so many other great teachers — and grateful.
Thanks, Rob. As always, a very thoughtful piece. Teleologist said, “I think this has become an even bigger problem that I thought, if someone like McKeever is giving credence to Beck as having a genuine Christian faith.” Actually, I’ve been very careful not to draw that conclusion at this point. As a follow up to an interview I recently had with a Christian publication in CA, I wrote, “Presuming [Beck] is a Christian while he may still hold to the heretical views that have historically prevented the LDS Church from being classified as Christian will not help Beck. Nor will it help evangelism among the Mormon people because Christians will erroneously assume there is no need to challenge their presuppositions.” Teleologist, I think you make a good point when you say, “Beck is a very smart guy and well read. Why would you expect him not to know what he believes in?” I have raised that same question, and for that reason I’ve been encouraging others not to let their wishful thinking cloud their judgment. Still, because I really don’t know what the Holy Spirit may or may not be doing in his life, I want to be cautious before assuming Beck is being outright deceitful.
Thank you for speaking up. I lived among the Utah Mormons for 6 years. One of the problems with Mormon theology is that it is dynamic because of the “living prophets”. They have the tendency to rewrite their beliefs as needed. One clear example of this was the reversal of the “curse of cain” in 1978. Where the Mormon church discovered they were at an impasse in their proselytizing in regions of the world where there was a high percentage of black and mulatto blood. Since the “revelation” in 1978 that was no longer an issue and their growth in those areas increased.
The other issue is terminology. Mormons make use of christian theological terms but mean vastly different things. Glen Beck may say he “needed” the “atonement” but atonement to the Mormon mind is universal, given to all. Mormons believe everyone is atoned for simply by being born. Moreover although the Mormons do talk about the cross, (more recently however) the traditional understanding is that atonement took place in the garden of Gethsemane.
One of the best resources I found for the study of Mormonism is Gerald and Sandra Tanner’s work “Mormonism Shadow or Rality”. Here are links to their website: http://www.utlm.org/
You can read their book about the “curse of Cain” online here: http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/curseofcain_contents.htm
More conspiracy…more paranoid threatened preachers. Afraid of losing your flock and the sound of coinage in the temple coffers. Perhaps Beck has no agenda but to better a nation by bringing them to Christ. What Christ? The very Savior of the Bible. The nature of which was not determined by some ancient Council voting for one doctrine as if the wind determined truth. Beck believes Christ to be the son of God…that simple…and salvation is through him alone
I’m sorry Keats, but reading through the list of Mormon beliefs given in the ariticle about, it doesn’t sound to me like they believe in the, “The very Savior of the Bible.” Their understanding of God, Jesus, and who He is are vastly different then the orthodox Christian understanding.
Their understanding of salvation is also vastly different.
It is just not the same thing at all!
Rusty – I agree wholeheartedly with you. And BTW – the Tanner’s are a wonderful resource. Very thorough.
Your point about differences in definitions is something I ran across constantly.
Bill McKeever said, “for that reason I’ve been encouraging others not to let their wishful thinking cloud their judgment.”
IMO, this is the wise course to take regarding Glenn Beck.
In my 20+ years of dealing with evangelizing those in non-Christian cults I do know that people do find salvation sometimes in spite of the cult’s false doctrine.
That said, the genuine Christian will respond to proper Biblical teaching and the Holy Spirit will lead them out of it.
Let’s not make judgment by mere appearances with Glenn Beck that we might make a right one.
I would disagree that this is a “thoughtful article.” It’s just standard “cut and paste” job from any number of anti-Mormon web sites.
Although there is certainly latitude to disagree with Glenn Beck’s politics and his religious views, I’d have to say that he has been incredibly effective at peeling back decades of anti-Mormon propaganda. That’s why anti-Mormons and the “counter-cult industry” are in full-scale panic mode. All the time and money they have spent trying to vilify Mormonism isn’t working.
It’s tough for you folks, being on the same side as Annas and Caiaphas, the Pharisees, the priests, and the scribes who opposed Jesus and the apostles.
The gospel continues to roll forth. New temples get built and dedicated despite all the protests and zoning commission fights. New meetinghouses pop up all over the world that are not mortgaged, but paid for outright by devoted tithe-payers. Missionaries continue to baptize almost a third of a million people every year.
And considering that all this occurs despite the best efforts of anti-Mormons to stop it, it shows how ineffective the opposition is.
Rob,
Can you explain why there is so much apparent ambiguity among evangelicals, even some who are recognized leaders, about where Beck stands? I am somewhat perplexed and disappointed by some of what I see happening.
I am reminded of a commentator I heard several months ago discussing the so-called hidden gospels. It was a topic that exposed her total lack of understanding of the whole field. The more she spoke, the worse it was. It is the same with Beck. If he stuck to political comments, it would be one thing; but when he speaks of spiritual things, his lack in this area is clearly seen.
The question should be is Glenn Beck born again ?
Or Is God simply using him, right where he is, to alert the nation
to the complete take over of our civil Govt by godless murderers,
50 million exterminated babies and counting , and now
homosexualizing the survivors, starting in kinderrgarten.
Is any one else preaching Matt 18:6 or comparing the attonement to the cult of liberation theology that is running rapid through African American and liberal churches ?
My take is that he encountered the real Jesus in his 12 step program and joined the Momon church , as that was is wife’s religion.His testimony of redemption through the blood of Jesus
is convincing and happened before he became a Mormon ! Mormonism is a non chritain cult but I know people trapped inside that cult that are born again .I was in a Roman catholic cult and got born again. There are Shriners ,ist level Masons, that are christains and decieved by that cults philanthropic deception.
What I have seen is that Glenn has a call to activate christains to pray. Mom’s arising prayer networks are popping up all over the US. Moms praying together for the deliverence of public school children. Moral citizens are getting involved to overturn the injustices that we have been praying and asking our heavenly father to deliverv this nation from; the sexual perversion of our entire culture ,murder-abortion,homosexualization and indoctrination of public school children into godlessness ,to name a few..God is preapraing this nation for an outpouring of his Holy Spirit; the unchurched non christain is hearing about divine providence ,that there is a God in heaven ,hearts are being softened ,conviction of sin unto salvation will follow..
I say where are the preachers ? where is the spirit of Elijah on
the John the baptists preparing the way of the Lord; hiding in there 501 c tax shelters ?. God bless Glen Beck for shaming them and all of us out of our complacancy..
Rob, I think you have done a great job of not satiating our need for a black and white look at Glen Beck all the while avoiding the “everyone is ok” tendency that we often want to gravitate toward.
Traditional Mormon doctrine is certianly not in line with biblical or historical Christianity, but who knows these days what Mormon is in line with traditional Mormon doctrine? It is hard to say. I pray that Glen Beck is not a good Mormon, but a bad one.
I, personally, even though I have watched countless hours of the Glen Beck show (as well as listening to him on the radio), have never heard him teach anything that sounded Mormon. In fact, if he never said he was a Mormon, I suppose that most of us would assume that he is a very committed Evangelical.
Not sure if this is good or bad. In some ways it seems to blur the lines between Christianity and Mormonism…this is bad.
Mark, you make a good point in quoting what FAIR says about grace and works. LDS apologists often claim that their religion does not teach that one can earn salvation, despite numerous statements by LDS religious leaders saying that one must do so. The problem here is complex but the heart of the problem is that Mormonism affirms two different meanings to “salvation”: a general salvation (immortality in some heavenly kingdom) that cannot be earned (everyone gets it, with or without faith, with or without works) and an individual salvation (eternal life in the celestial kingdom) that is conditioned on our works. It is natural to say that if you must do works to get it then you have to earn it, and again many LDS leaders have said just that; but some Mormons, especially theologians and apologists more sensitive to evangelical criticisms, argue that it doesn’t mean you have to earn it.
My own view is that we should not criticize Mormonism for teaching salvation by works, because in fact it doesn’t. It teaches exaltation to godhood by works. Salvation in the sense of immortal life in a glorious heavenly kingdom is absolutely free in Mormon theology, and in fact virtually everyone gets it, whether they believe, live a good life, or are wicked unbelievers. In short, the real problem with LDS soteriology is that it is a tweaked version of universalism.
I hope we have some thoughtful Mormons post comments here. I have to say that I am disappointed in the two comments from that side that have appeared here so far. The notion that evangelical critics of LDS religion are in a panic because of Beck is just plain silly.
John,
Evangelicals have differing views of Beck in part because Beck himself is difficult to pin down. He’s clearly LDS, but it isn’t clear that his religious views are altogether consistent with LDS theology. Since he’s a political commentator and culture warrior, I don’t want to fault him too much for not being more precise theologically, whatever his views might be.
It also is a fact that evangelical and LDS beliefs overlap in both cultural/ethical issues and theological issues. Mormons are pro-life, opposed to same-sex marriage, etc.; and theologically they believe, for example, in the physical resurrection of Christ–something a number of leading Episcopal theologians won’t affirm! Naturally, conservative evangelicals, especially those actively involved in the culture wars, are pleased by a lot that someone like Beck says, even though he’s not an evangelical.
The same issue arises, though the theological divide is not as wide, with regard to someone like Sean Hannity, a Roman Catholic. As a former Catholic, I’m sensitive to the theological problems in Catholicism, but this doesn’t prevent me from recognizing that Hannity has a lot of good things to say, including things he says about Christianity. The difference is that as I see it Catholicism teaches the true God (the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity) and the true doctrine of Christ (the classic doctrine of the Incarnation), so that the object of faith in Catholicism is the same as in evangelical Protestantism. This is regrettably not the case in Mormonism.
It would be great if we could all learn to separate people from the issues that they may or may not be promoting. Glenn Beck is first of all a human being before anything else. Whether anyone here likes or hates his message, I’d like you all to imagine sitting across the dinner table from the man. Would you just hammer him to find out what he really believes? And once you do, would you only be interested it in either straightening him out or encouraging him to continue doing what you agree with?
I’m not saying we can’t strongly disagree on issues and beliefs or shouldn’t debate the proper relationship between faith and politics. But if we define another human being by just categorizing or labelling him or her according to our own bias, we are neither loving this person as ourselves nor will we do any good beyond drawing lines in the sand and making judgments that are going far beyond opinions and preferences. What if the most important thing about Glenn Beck is not what he believes about God but what God believes about him apart from anything he has or hasn’t done? Think about it!
Rob, thanks for responding. As one who was baptized at 8 yrs old as an RLDS (now Community of Christ), and still has several family members in that religion, I don’t disagree. However, I’d say there are many other problems with LDS theology such as who God is. The very nature of God in LDS theology is not that of Christianity. While similar terms are used it can sometimes be difficult to recognize LDS theology. Yet if we listen closely, as in Beck’s case, with how words like atonement are used it becomes more apparent.
Not that I am stating anything you don’t know. 🙂
Josh, I think you misunderstand what some people are saying here. We have no personal animosity toward Beck. This is not personal. I would probably like him personally if I ever get a chance to meet him. I like many of the efforts he is doing socially. Josh, please try to remember what the impetus of this whole conversion was about. It started with the concern that Beck’s talk of god and his association to Christianity but still unabashedly declare that he is a Mormon. Furthermore there have been indications that some very well grounded Christians are beginning to accept his confession as salvific within Christian orthodoxy.
So while you might think this is some sort of invective hurled at Beck, in reality it is a criticism and warning for Christians and non-believing seekers. The warning is that Mormonism is a cult regardless of how closely Beck’s language resembles orthodoxy Christianity; it will not lead one to salvation in Jesus Christ. This is not about Beck at all. It is all about Christians.
According to Rob’s explanation of what Mormons believe, they are not Christians, if this is true. I have no idea what they believe, but if they believe this, they must also have their own bible, and they most definitely would not be Christian. Their teaching that all go to heaven regardless of faith, is contrary to the Christian bible. The bible tells us in the Lord’s prayer “our father which art in heaven”. Jesus then tells us he is the only way to the father, which is in heaven. Therefore, to get to any heaven, we must have faith in Jesus. In Christianity, not everyone gets to heaven, only those who believe, those who get to the father through Jesus. I know this is obvious to all bible readers who do have understanding of Mormonism, but I just wanted to answer the question presented in this post with my 2 cents, whatever that is worth.
@teleologist:
My point was not personal animosity. And like I said, I have no problem with debating issues like mormonism. I also think I understand very well where you see the danger of evangelicals accepting his God-talk as salvific. Someone who frames orthodoxy (in the sense of true content) as a prerequisite of God that has to be met before He will accept a person, necessarily will have to argue against anything that would not meet these demands.
Needless to say, I totally disagree with the belief that salvation has anything to do with us meeting demands of God in the first place – which must make me look at least as suspect as Beck himself now since that doesn’t jive with this”orthodox” understanding of salvation.
I do not know Mr. Beck’s story or how he became a Mormon or was born into it? But I want to say, as a side note, there are a lot of people who are not allowed to go to church, or cannot go to the church they want to go to, probably many people born in cults, and such similar things.
I sat here reading this, and I thought about Daniel in the Bible. It does seem like his parents experienced revival with Josiah, and therefore, Daniel in captivity, although all was taken away from Daniel, even his name, everything, they could not take away what was in his heart. And His Heart belonged to God.
Daniel could not do sacrifices or carry out any of the typical practices of Israel, yes? Yet, the Lord was with him. And Daniel could not offer sacrifices for atonement or any such thing. Why did God love him so much?
Sometimes in the most trying situations or even ignorance, don’t we have to just stand in awe and say, with God all things are possible? Praise the Lord that Glenn Beck said what he did.
All glory to God.
[…] It’s been in the news and just won’t and shouldn’t go away. Are Mormons Christians? The question has been raised of late because of Glenn Beck’s rise to prominence in the media. Rob Bowman at Parchment and Pen, a theology blog, has a detailed, easy-to-read summary answer at Are Mormons Christians? […]
Mormonism IS a cult.
There may be “real Christians” within Mormonism, but it’s awfully hard to understand how that could happen (because of the wacky, messed up, ‘me centered’ theology that discounts the Trinity) apart form the grace of God.
There might even be “real Christians” in some of our churches.
The wheat and the tares grow together. We can’t tell them apart…but God can.
I agree with Steve that there could be “real Christians” within mormonism. The bible says Paul became a Jew to win the Jews, and without law to those without law to gain those without law. We are free in Christ to infiltrate the Mormons if we wish. Just not my cup of tea if you know what i mean.
Excellent article.
And if it turns out that I do get my own planet, I’ll be just fine with that, I guess. As long as this happens regardless of whether I’m Mormon or Evangelical, I’m happy to hedge my bet and stay Evangelical. Oh, and also because of that whole orthodoxy thing.
Ok…I understand that we cannot judge a person because only God can know the heart. And after reading the reply-posts I can understand why many (including myself) hold out hope for Mr. Beck’s salvation-as we all should for all who are lost. However, something that I feel had not been addressed is Beck’s motives behind his statements. Arguably, his largest followers claim to be of the Christian faith. To claim to be something that has been taught as heresy would mean the loss of many many viewers. So he pulls terms from his Mormon theology that resonates within the Christian community (although these terms hold obviously different meanings across the theology divide) and placated his viewers while still holding true to his Mormon doctrines. Confused? He basically is concealing his “truth” to gain viewership ie. money. The Bible warns us of wolves in sheeps’ clothing. No different than today’s TV evangelists….give them what they want to hear and the money will come pouring in. Mormons (like other cultists) believe the lie of Satan…you shall become like a god. And in my opinion Beck seems to believe he is there. We are stupid stupid sheep…
My wife is of a Catholic background, and I am of an evangelical protestant background. When we were dating she began attending the church I was going to. Even after finding out she was Catholic, several derogatory comments about Catholicism were made in her presence by people who knew she was Catholic. The preacher himself even made a remark from the pulpit. It didn’t take long for her to finally be insulted enough that we no longer attend there. The church we attend now is pastored by a long-time missionary friend of mine. who was pleasantly surprised to hear of her experience as a Catholic, which was far different from what he expected. Those at the previous church were so blinded by their bias against anyone Catholic that they didn’t take the time to find out anything about her, but were sure quick to judge her. The same hold principle holds true for Glenn Beck. Many things he has said sound evangelical and biblical. As Karen said, we don’t know how or why he became a Mormon. Nor do we know for sure if he truly understands the difference between Mormon doctrine and Christian doctrine, as Mormonism tries so hard to “sound Christian.” It sure seems his beliefs don’t line up with what is considered “mainstream Mormonism.” The bottom line is that it’s not my place to judge Him. His relationship with Christ is just that, HIS relationship. Only Glenn and Jesus know where that relationship truly is. It is not OUR faith that saves us, but the faith of GOD that He put in us that we simply respond to. I do, however, agree with his general plea that America needs to turn back to God. We, as a Nation, need to humble ourselves, pray, seek His face and turn from our wicked ways. In other words, acknowledge and seek after His truth, put Him first in everything, and seek to live in HIS righteousness, and THEN He promises to heal our land.
What’s deeply troubling to me about Beck is completely beside the point from whether or what kind of Mormon he is, but rather about the cult *of personality* he’s got around him; that his Mormonism is an “issue” just points to the underlying issue of the eager desire of so many people to take him on as “their kind of guy.” He parlays down-home religiosity into this cult of personality that is itself a “partisan political movement” (as Russell Moore is quoted above to have suggested) all unto its own (all unto HIS own, that is to say). Not only that, but it is indeed also “at worst” just as Moore suggests, since that’s certainly what Beck is all about.
It’s also deeply troubling that so many people like him to begin with, and even think that “most people like him”! No, good people, whenever the America we all thought we knew, the democratic constitutional republic, goes down the tubes, it will be replaced by a jingoistic, faux-populist, fascism (you see, he uses the word so much, he’ll kill its meaning so it can never be used on him, even though it manifestly applies to himself), a code of uniformity that loudly trumpets itself as patriotic and God-fearing, led by some charismatic pied-piper demagogue *just like Glenn Beck.* (Understand that nothing I have said should be taken to imply any favor whatsoever toward Obama – it’s Beck’s insistence that he and his “movement” are our “last best hope,” or whatever nonsense, that is exactly the danger. The parallels with 1930s Germany are striking indeed, and show it to be indeed a real danger.)
One place where Beck really sounds like a Mormon is when he actually claims to be a Mormon. He also admits that Mormon doctrine is different which is one of the things that attracted him to Mormonism. He has also corrected Roman Catholics from what he remembers the Catholic church taught from his Catholic days.
We don’t know why or how Beck became a Mormon? His conversion story is promoted by LDS sources and stated to be one that will strengthen LDS faith. He admits to reading Bruce McConkie’s Mormon doctrine and how he put the Mormon missionaries through the ringer. You can hear a portion of his An Unlikely Mormon: The Conversion Story of Glenn Beck online. He further explains how he and his wife did their investigation.
Even if Beck likes arguing with idiots, he’s not one. I’m not sure why people act as if he holds to some unknown faith in which he just likes attach some labels.
It’s easier to see that Glenn Beck isn’t a follower of the Gospel by the fact that he is a disingenuous inciter and profiteer than by the fact that he’s a Mormon.
Also, Marty goes to the future in the 2nd movie, not the 3rd.
There is one, and only one, reason evangelicals are now accepting Glenn Beck and other Mormons: partisan politics. Theology is utterly irrelevant to the political considerations.
Thanks for the article. I don’t watch Glenn Beck, but I did see an interview with him and his wife some months ago. He became a Mormon because that was the request of his wife; apparently she would not marry him if he did not convert.
I have no idea how closely he adheres to Mormon doctrine or practices. My primary concern for Christians who follow him is that they seem to have confused the gospel–the Good News of salvation–with a political movement.
I am a Mormon on a deadline, but, very quickly…
The Book of Mormon which Mormons use in addition to the Bible, says, “it is only in and through the grace of God that ye are saved.”
Mormons teach we are saved by grace. What does that mean? Mormons believe grace is a completely free gift which everyone receives. Through grace, we are able to overcome death and live forever–somewhere. Where depends on our actions. Only those who accept Jesus as their Savior live with God, contrary to what was stated in this article. Evangelicals also believe we are saved by acts, since accepting Jesus as our Savior is an act. Through grace we are also able to repent, because the atonement makes that possible. Otherwise, why is repentence even mentioned in the Bible?
However, the Bible says, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 7:21.) It doesn’t get clearer than that. Only evangelicals adopted the post-biblical idea that actions have no impact on our eternal life. The Bible is filled with warnings about the importance of keeping the commandments. They aren’t just suggestions. If you say you accept Jesus as your Savior, but then live a life of sin–not because you’re imperfect but because you don’t care what God taught, are you really a Christian? Our actions are in part a measure of our love and committment. However, doing good all day long won’t save you if it isn’t for the right reasons–the pure love of Christ.
I think Mormons and evangelicals agree that God’s presence is reserved for those who truly love God and don’t just preach, but do. As the Bible says, even the devils believe in God, and the Pharisees preached, but Jesus didn’t have much respect for them.
To learn more: Have you Been Saved?
http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index…
[…] the blog post titled, “ARE MORMONS CHRISTIANS?: Glenn Beck and that Question Again” in its […]
Amy Jo,
Did you listen to the link I gave about about Beck’s testimony? He tells about his inverstigative reading and many visits with Mormon officials. It wasn’t a matter of simply becoming a Mormon so his wife would marry him.
This can also been heard in an interview which can be found online where he tells about his wife wanting a family religion. Again, he didn’t just throw down the gaunlet and say “ok, I’ll go ahead and become a Mormon.” He actually associates his breaking into being a talk show host with his conversion. He mentions how God was watching over him.
There are interviews on his website where he speaks of being a Mormon and he understands the doctrines are different.
While Bill McKeever may not be “soft” on Mormonism, he may very well be “warm” to American right-wing-ism, which would still likewise colour his assessment of Beck’s soteriology in a more positive light.
Moreover, Glenn Beck knows his audience: they are orthodox Christians. Beck knows better than to espouse his Mormon doctrine in any robust sense, because he knows that Christians explicitly reject his faith as a heresy. Therefore, Beck knows he cannot talk about his soteriology in any more than a very thin sense about “Jesus” and “the Cross” and “salvation.” McKeever says that he has no reason to suspect that Beck is anything but sincere, but is that really the case? I can think of many: ratings, popularity, money, etc.
As long as he keeps it a very thin soteriology, ANYONE can agree with it. This is why the Patristic creeds list not only what we AFFIRM, but also what we DENY. If we only talk about what we affirm, then Arians and other heretics would be in. We must also talk about what we DENY.
extremestan,
You’re right about it being BTTF II, not III. I tried to fix this but apparently it was too late to make any edits.
I don’t happen to see Beck as disingenuous, but that’s apparently a political perspective, which is not my focus here.
Hello Rob. I’ll take a shot at responding to your summary of my faith here. Looking down the list, I didn’t see anything particularly anti-biblical, but I’ll explain that in a bit. Here goes:
* All human beings preexisted in heaven, where they were the offspring of heavenly parents (God the Father and a “heavenly mother”), before their natural conception here on earth.
This is not a counter-biblical notion, and I’d argue that even calling in un-biblical is misleading (since most people tend to equate “un-biblical” with “anti-biblical”). Certainly, this Mormon teaching is not anti-biblical, though it is probably extra-biblical.
Always keep in mind the LDS position – we don’t care if something is explicitly stated in the Bible or not. Since we believe in additional scripture and ongoing revelation, we already operate from the assumption that more will be said than is contained in the Bible. We also (like the Catholics) reject the notion of Biblical sufficiency (which ironically, is itself an extra-biblical notion).
Thus the Mormon only cares whether his arguments are anti-biblical or not. He is supremely indifferent to whether his arguments are extra-biblical or not. We maintain the Bible as part of our canon, and therefore are concerned with the prospect of that book directly contradicting something we believe, but we are not shy at all about filling in the blanks via continuing revelation where the Bible is silent.
Also, I would like to clarify what exactly you mean by the word “offspring.” Because Mormon theology allows a wide latitude here.
* Our Heavenly Father was a man who became a God—proving that we, too, can become gods.
It’s not that simple. There are differing views about the nature of God’s past within the realm of LDS theology.
One view posits an infinite chain of Gods extending into an infinite past. This is a popular folk doctrine held by many Mormons – but it is not necessarily required by either our canon of scripture, or the statements of modern prophets since Joseph Smith.
Many modern LDS scholars are positing that Joseph Smith’s famous King Follet sermon (commonly quoted in support of God once being a “sinful mortal man”) is misread – that it does not require God the Father to have EVER been anything less than divine. This new reading of Joseph Smith asserts that he was actually speaking of God the Father having experienced mortality in the same way Jesus Christ himself did – not as a sinful man, but as fully divine. They claim there was never a time when God the Father was not divine.
I am agnostic on the issue myself, but Evangelicals need to realize that their preferred characterizations of Mormon doctrine are not the only options available to a Mormon who is reading his scriptures, and the statements of modern prophets.
* Jesus Christ is the “firstborn” of God’s billions of spirit children and the first of those children to become a God.
Again, modern LDS scholarship is positing otherwise. They claim Christ was with the Father from the beginning and always held special and distinct status from the rest of us. This summary statement also leaves it unclear exactly what you mean by the term “spirit children.”
* As such, Christ is one of three Gods in the “Godhead,” as is the Holy Spirit, another of God’s spirit sons.
Gender of the Holy Ghost is not explicitly stated – merely assumed. Also, this statement ignores the radical and interpenetrating unity shared by all three members of the Godhead. Christ is not consided to be a “separate God” in his own right under LDS theology.
* Christ is the “Only Begotten,” which means that he is the only human being whom God the Father literally begat in the flesh. God is Jesus’ literal father in the flesh (allowing Jesus to “inherit” some divine powers other humans do not have) and Mary is his literal mother.
I suppose this is a polite way of alluding to the popular Evangelical accusation lobbed at Mormons that “hey, you guys believe that God had sex with Mary.” Which, for the record, most Mormons do not personally believe. We have no doctrine of how Christ was conceived, except that – like the Bible says – it was done by the Holy Spirit. Other than that clarification, no beefs here.
* Christ’s atonement guarantees immortal life in some heavenly kingdom to virtually all human beings, including those who willfully reject Christ.
Sure, but that doesn’t mean that you’re going to like the result of rejecting Christ and sinning either. When LDS theology speaks of “hell”, it can mean either a final destination (termed Outer Darkness, and reserved for very few people), or the temporary suffering of the LDS equivalent of purgatory (not an exact match, but conceptually close enough). It is after the temporary state of suffering that those who did not accept Christ eventually wind up in a degree of glory.
* Christ (and God the Father) appeared to Joseph Smith to tell him to join none of the churches because all of them were wrong and their creeds were an abomination.
True. For an example, I always say “see Five Point Calvinism.”
* Through Joseph Smith, God restored lost scriptures (e.g., the Book of Mormon) and inspired new ones (Doctrine & Covenants), from which Mormons learn the doctrines that set them apart from the rest of Christianity.
True, but wrong focus. Our scriptures are supremely indifferent as to what the differences between us and you are. They focus instead on restoring the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. Any differences from that are your own affair.
* Christ organized the only true Church in these latter days with a hierarchical system of “priesthood authority” required to teach or baptize others.
Yes.
* Full forgiveness of sins and entrance into the highest heavenly kingdom, where God and Christ live, come to those who become members of the LDS Church, follow its teachings, and participate in its temple rituals, notably baptisms and other rites performed on behalf of the dead.
Full forgiveness of sins is offered to all.
It’s just that those who choose to accept it will ultimately accept the designated ordinances as token of their repentance and conversion.
* The ultimate goal of the gospel and of LDS religion is to become gods, with the same powers and potential as the Heavenly Father.
But not INDEPENDENT of the Father. We believe any glory and power we attain will only be via our unity with the Father, and will be derivative from the Father. We do not believe that we fly off to a separate corner of the galaxy to establish our own independent kingdom.
I apologize for the multiple posts. Mr. Bowman’s bullet point style kind of suggested the format. I do have more to say here, but figured I’d best leave it here for now.
I am a Mormon but not a fan of Beck. Based on what I see, I think Beck’s religion is very squarely within Mormonism and he fairly represents what many mormons believe, i think Rob Bowman’s point though is important:
Based on my understanding of Evangelicalism and Mormonism, Beck may be a Mormon, but he could very well be “saved” in an Evangelical framework since it appears that he does have a faith in Jesus and relies on that faith to save him from his sins. Surprisingly enough, this belief is entirely consistent with being a strong Mormon, although some LDS do not quite believe things this way.
Evangelicals that believe in the strange caricature of the Mormon cult follower that is often drawn by the counter-cult groups simply won’t ever get who the LDS are, and how close in belief they are.
I think Evangelicals would be surprised on what they would learn about LDS and themselves by engaging in less confrontational dialogue.
A good place to start is this blog:
summatheologica.wordpress.com
or This: ldstalk.wordpress.com
Those links:
http://summatheologica.wordpress.com/
http://ldstalk.wordpress.com/2010/09/21/glenn-beck-are-you-really-a-mormon/
Terrie,
You wrote, with regard to LDS doctrine: “Only those who accept Jesus as their Savior live with God, contrary to what was stated in this article.” Where did I state otherwise?
You also wrote: “Only evangelicals adopted the post-biblical idea that actions have no impact on our eternal life. The Bible is filled with warnings about the importance of keeping the commandments. They aren’t just suggestions. If you say you accept Jesus as your Savior, but then live a life of sin–not because you’re imperfect but because you don’t care what God taught, are you really a Christian?”
There is a lot of confusion to untangle here. Evangelical theology teaches that those who have genuinely accepted Christ as Savior will in fact care about obeying God. Anyone who claims to be a Christian but doesn’t care about obeying God is from our perspective a liar. But the Bible also teaches that our forgiveness and acceptance by God is not based on our obedience (good works) but on Christ’s death in our place (e.g., Eph. 2:8-10; Titus 3:4-7; 1 John 1:9). Good works are the fruit, not the root, of salvation; they are evidence, not prerequisites, for salvation.
LDS doctrine, in reality, teaches that everyone gets eternal life even if they don’t believe at all and even if they live despicably wicked lives. It’s just that LDS doctrine doesn’t CALL it “eternal life.” Instead, it makes a semantically tricky distinction between “immortality” (which everyone, including atheists and unrepentant criminals, gets) and “eternal life” (entrance into the celestial kingdom, which only good Mormons get). But biblically, and in terms of what the words mean, immortality is the same thing as immortal life; and immortal life is the same thing as eternal life. You said it yourself: in LDS doctrine everyone will “live forever–somewhere.” There is no difference between living forever and having eternal life. These are synonymous expressions.
The Bible does emphasize the importance of faith and works, but the consequence for a life of rebellion against God is not the consolation prize of immortal life in a somewhat less glorious heavenly kingdom. The consequence is God’s judgment of righteous wrath resulting in eternal punishment, being consigned to the outer darkness, cast into the lake of fire (Gehenna, or “hell”).
“Christ’s atonement guarantees immortal life in some heavenly kingdom to virtually all human beings, including those who willfully reject Christ.” This suggests you think Mormon believe we can live with God without believing in Christ. This isn’t true.
The complication comes from the definitions of heaven and hell. The consequences you discribed for a life of disobedience requires you to be alive, yes? If you’re dead, you won’t know you’re being punished. We do believe there is a place for the wicked, but not everyone who does not accept Jesus as his Savior is wicked–do you not know any good Jewish people? I do. Will God treat a Jew who has lived a valient life obeying the commandments he knew about, serving others, and putting God first the same fate as a rapist? Of course not. The Mormon God is loving and just.
To a Mormon who loves God, being separated from Him for eternity is a horrible fate. No physical location’s nastiness can be worse than that punishment.
You are correct that our obedience and good acts can be the result of our love and faith. However, it is possible to do those exact same acts mechanically because you want a reward, and not because you love God. God knows the difference, and the difference matters in what happens later. Mormons believe a true believer will strive every day to live as God taught out of love. It is a manifestation of his faith, and God gave us commandments because He intends us to obey them. There will be consequences for not obeying and not repenting, because no unclean thing can enter into Heaven.
Being a Christian is more than just saying the right words once. It is, as you know, a lifetime committment requiring actions and belief both. It is largely a semantical argument. I hope you’ll follow the link I offered for a better explanation.
Rob,
While it is fair to say that Mormon doctrine is thoroughly non-Protestant (and non-Catholic) it is unfair to say that it is “unbiblical,” or “radically incompatible with the biblical gospel.” I recognize that your understanding of the relevant Biblical verses is different than mine, but that doesn’t make my understanding any less Biblical, only less Protestant. And while I think that your points are an honest representation of your understanding of Mormon doctrine, they are incomplete, and in a few cases inaccurate, and thus misleading.
I’d like to address each of your points, but I don’t think I can do it in the 2000 characters allotted per post. If you’re not opposed to multiple posts, I’ll make the attempt. Let me know.
Terrie, you wrote: “This suggests you think Mormon believe we can live with God without believing in Christ.” No, what I said was simply that Mormons believe people can live SOMEWHERE, in some heavenly kingdom, without believing in Christ. True, they won’t be with God the Father, but they will be living forever, in immortal bodies, in a glorious heavenly kingdom that is much better than where we find ourselves right now. And they can get there without ever putting faith in Christ OR living a decent moral life. That is the LDS doctrine.
You wrote: “To a Mormon who loves God, being separated from Him for eternity is a horrible fate. No physical location’s nastiness can be worse than that punishment.” Your qualification “physical” is apparently an attempt to gloss over the big picture of LDS doctrine. The telestial and terrestrial kingdoms are kingdoms of glory and are a whole lot better than outer darkness, the fate of the “sons of perdition” in LDS doctrine. Those sons of perdition are the only humans that won’t receive immortality, and not because they were bad people but because they rejected the LDS gospel despite having a “testimony” that it is true. The inhabitants of the telestial kingdom reject Christ in this life AND in the next life, but they still get immortality in a glorious heavenly realm!