5

The following is an excerpt from pages 471 and 472 of Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce R. McConkie:

  1. Unconditional or general salvation, that which comes by grace alone without obedience to gospel law, consists in the mere fact of being resurrected. In this sense salvation is synonymous with immortality; it is the inseparable connection of body and spirit so that the resurrected personage lives forever.
  This kind of salvation eventually will come to all mankind, excepting only the sons of perdition. In their case, after their resurrection, "they shall return again to their own place" (D. & C. 88:32); after coming forth in immortality and standing before the judgment bar, because they are "filthy still, ... they shall go away into everlasting fire, prepared for them; and their tonnent is as a lake of fire and brimstone, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever and has no end." (2 Ne. 9:13-16.) They are resurrected but they are not redeemed from the devil. "They shall be as though there had been no redemption made; for they cannot be redeemed according to God's justice; and they cannot die, seeing there is no more corruption." (Alma 12:18.) Thus it is that the Lord "saves all the works of his hands, except those sons of perdition who deny the Son after the Father has revealed him." (D. & C. 76:40-48.) All others are saved from death, hell, the devil, and endless torment. (2 Ne. 9: 18-27.)
  But this is not the salvation of righteousness, the salvation which the saints seek. Those who gain only this general or unconditional salvation will still be judged according to their works and receive their places in a terrestrial or a telestial kingdom. They will, therefore, be damned; their eternal progression will be cut short; they will not fill the full measure of their creation, but in eternity will be ministering servants to more worthy persons.

  2. Conditional or individual salvation, that which comes by grace coupled with gospel obedience, consists in receiving an inheritance in the celestial kingdom of God. This kind of salvation follows faith, repentance, baptism, receipt of the Holy Ghost, and continued righteousness to the end of one's mortal probation. (D. & C. 20:29; 2 Ne. 9:23-24.) All others are damned, for as Amulek said: "How can ye be saved except ye inherit the kingdom of heaven?" Further: Christ "shall come into the world to redeem his people; and he shall take upon him the transgressions of those who believe on his name; and these are they that shall have eternal life, and salvation cometh to none else. Therefore the wicked remain as though (here had been no redemption made, except it be the loosing of the bands of death; for behold, the day Cometh that all shall rise from the dead and stand before God, and be judged according to their works." (Alma 11:37-41.)
  Even those in the celestial kingdom, however, who do not go on to exaltation, will have immortality only and not eternal life. Along with those of the telestial and terrestrial worlds they will be "ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory." They will live "separately and singly" in an unmarried state "without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity." (D. & C. 132:16-17.)

  3. Salvation in its true and full meaning is synonymous with exaltation or eternal life and consists in gaining an inheritance in the highest of the three heavens within the celestial kingdom. With few exceptions this is the salvation of which the scriptures speak. It is the salvation which the saints seek. It is of this which the Lord says, "There is no gift greater than the gift of salvation." (D. & C. 6:13.) This full salvation is obtained in and through the continuation of the family unit in eternity, and those who obtain it are gods. (D. & C. 131:1-4; 132.)
  Full salvation is attained by virtue of knowledge, truth, righteousness, and all true principles. Many conditions must exist in order to make such salvation available to men. Without the atonement, the gospel, the priesthood, and the sealing power, there would be no salvation. Without continuous revelation, the ministering of angels, the working of miracles, the prevalence of gifts of the spirit, there would be no salvation. If it had not been for Joseph Smith and the restoration, there would be no salvation. There is no salvation outside The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 2, pp. 1350.)

I've highlighted the portion "If it had not been for Joseph Smith and the restoration, there would be no salvation. There is no salvation outside The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" as it's the most likely to provoke disagreement from Christians outside the LDS faith, although this is my educated guess.

From the perspective of Christians not affiliated with the LDS Church, are there any inconsistencies between the LDS concept of salvation and what the Bible teaches about salvation?

In other words, are there specific doctrines about salvation taught by the Bible that we can be highly confident about (let's label them as X) and specific doctrines about salvation that the LDS Church is highly confident about (let's label them as Y), such that X and Y are mutually exclusive, meaning they cannot both be true simultaneously?

1

6 Answers 6

5

As a Christian not affiliated with the LDS, and having spent over 40 years studying the Christian doctrine of salvation as explained in the Bible, there is one immense, inconsistent difference with the LDS teaching that, alone, shows why Christians must flag this up.

In a nutshell, it is that biblical salvation can only be achieved on our behalf by a sinless, uncreated one who is deity in the same sense that God the Father and God the Holy Spirit are sinless, uncreated deity. Yet, not three gods - the one Creator God of the Bible. The LDS faith insists that Jesus Christ had a starting point in time, being created by spirit god Elohim with his spirit goddess wife, as the first of their immense family of spirit creatures. The Trinity doctrine stands in the way of the LDS doctrine of salvation.

The LDS 'plan of salvation' can only be understood when their teaching of three levels of "the kingdom" is grasped. They say that Christ's death was to ensure a resurrection from the grave to all humanity - not that faith in what he did will save from sins and the wrath of God's righteous judgment on all sinners. They teach that man is not saved by the redemptive work of Christ or through the shedding of his blood at Calvary. They believe, rather, that "The very germs of these Godlike attributes (of the Father and Son) being engendered in man, the offspring of Deity, only need cultivating, improving, developing and advancing by means of a series of changes, in order to arrive at the fountain head, the standard, the climax of Divine Humanity."

When the LDS promotes human work and efforts to pull themselves up by their bootstraps to reach 'Divine Humanity', then it makes sense to them that the Christ only needed to die to secure a guaranteed resurrection from the grave, so that such a work could be continued for those who are to reach the highest level of their idea of the kingdom.

Nobody who knows even the basic doctrines in the Bible about sin, fallen human nature, God's wrath righteously deserved on sinners, but being poured on his sinless, only-begotten Son on the cross in our stead, can fail to see why the LDS doctrine of salvation is inconsistent with the Bible's.

Just a personal point - already, comments here are being swamped with arguments seeking to justify LDS doctrines, taking answerers to task on points. That is an abuse of the comments system, therefore I will not respond to any comments to me, re. my answer. I have no need to justify anything I've said. I have no need to defend Christian doctrine re. salvation. As they say around here, "You can either like it, or lump it."

1
  • 1
    Very powerful argument. The Trinity doctrine stands in the way of the LDS doctrine of salvation. Up-voted +1.
    – Nigel J
    Mar 30 at 10:19
4
+50

The following are taken from the top voted answer to the question: According to Mormonism, how does a person get saved?

We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Faith in Jesus Christ is understood to include acceptance of his latter-day prophets and apostles (Joseph Smith and successors) and the additional Testament he has given (the Book of Mormon) as well as the Old Testament and the New Testament. Anyone may repent and all are commanded to, but repentance must be genuine and involve a permanent change of conduct, not lip service only. The ordinances of baptism and the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost must be performed by those who have been ordained to the same priesthood given to Joseph Smith and according to the order of the Church.

Of the 4 Gospel ordinances honored by LDS only number 2, repentance, could possibly be considered common ground with mainstream, historical Christianity given the outlined understanding: "Anyone may repent and all are commanded to, but repentance must be genuine and involve a permanent change of conduct, not lip service only."

Unfortunately that repentance is unto faith in Christ, which is qualified thus: "Faith in Jesus Christ is understood to include acceptance of his latter-day prophets and apostles (Joseph Smith and successors) and the additional Testament he has given (the Book of Mormon)".

Therefore salvation, in LDS eyes, requires repentance unto acceptance of Joseph Smith as a prophet, the Book of Mormon as another testament of Jesus Christ, and the LDS Church and it's priesthood as God's only instrument for conferring baptism and impartation of the Holy Spirit. All of this is excluded from mainstream, historical Christianity at large, which would say that believing such things disqualifies one from salvation as it details a different Gospel and a different Christ.

Another item, from the accepted answer to that same question, is that "Men and women cannot enter the Celestial Kingdom alone:":

Eternal marriage is an essential ordinance that must be performed in order to be exalted, a man or a woman must be sealed to their spouse in the temple before they can be permitted into the presence of the Father. There is however an order to which married couples are admitted into the kingdom, the man enters first, and then guides in his wife. This is just the order of things, the man holds the priesthood, so it is natural that he would perform the ordinance for his wife, or if you want to chew on some more meatier doctrines, his wives, but that's probably best saved for a different question.

This is also fully rejected by mainstream historical Christianity; the Apostle Paul actually stating that singleness is a giftedness which, if received, is better than the married state:

For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn. - 1 Corinthians 7:7-9

But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord: But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife. - 1 Corinthians 7:32-33

Later in this same chapter (v. 38) Paul also says that a man who gives his daughter to a marriage does well but a man who does not give her in marriage does better.

There are many other differences such that it is impossible to consider mainstream historical Christianity and LDS as anything other than two completely different, mutually exclusive faiths but they need not be enumerated. Just these two things suffice to set them completely at odds:

  1. The Jesus Christ that they proclaim is one of three separate and distinct Gods; the other two being Heavenly Father and Holy Spirit. Therefore the God they worship cannot be the God of mainstream, historical Christianity, which God is the only God ever anywhere.

  2. Faith in Jesus Christ is understood to include acceptance of his latter-day prophets and apostles (Joseph Smith and successors) and the additional Testament he has given (the Book of Mormon) as well as the Old Testament and the New Testament. Therefore the faith in Christ that they proclaim is not the faith in Christ of historical, mainstream Christianity which utterly rejects Joseph Smith and the inspiration of the Book of Mormon.

With such stark foundational differences one wonders why they attempt to claim a place underneath the umbrella of Christianity at all. Of course, the answer is that they claim to be the restoration of the true and original Gospel which, of course, cannot be accepted without fully rejecting the mainstream, historical Gospel.

Mutual exclusivity is at the very heart of the whole thing and there is grave danger to the Christian who is wooed and wavers by subtle speech towards another Jesus or another Spirit or another Gospel:

For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. - 2 Corinthians 11:2-4

 

12
  • 2
    Yes, agreed. 'Stark foundational differences,' indeed. Up-voted +1.
    – Nigel J
    Mar 30 at 10:19
  • 1
    you asked about Paul and his statement here. Faith in Jesus Christ is understood to include... is false, anyone can have faith in Jesus without any of the other details
    – depperm
    Apr 4 at 14:55
  • @depperm That is something you will have to take up with the LDS answerer and commenter to the linked question I pulled it from. Apr 4 at 15:18
  • @MikeBorden Why not just quote official church sources? It would hardly be appropriate to reject the Bible by critiquing a Bible commentary. Apr 6 at 15:07
  • 1
    Revelation 20:12 "And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done." Romans 2:6-8 "6 He will render to each one according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury"
    – Mark
    Apr 9 at 14:20
2

John 3:16

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

John 6:29

Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent."

Ephesians 2:8-9

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

These 3 verses tell us all we need to know: Salvation is from Faith alone; Faith in Jesus, not Joseph Smith.

Thus, John, Jesus Himself, and Paul all tell us that nothing more is needed for salvation than faith in Jesus as the Son of God and the Resurrection. Provided, there are a couple of caveats: True faith means that you live your life through Christ, i.e. humble, kind repentant, perhaps baptism, but certainly not faith in a new prophet. The first Christians did not even have Gospels, yet we can be sure they were saved. Paul was not an eyewitness, yet we can be sure he was saved. The Apostles, even, did not have Joseph, yet we can be sure they were saved.

Thus, nowhere in the NT does it say anything about a caveat for those in the modern age that tells us we must believe in the Book of Mormon. I have great respect for all Christians, and surely Mormons will be saved as well, but it will not be because of an un-prophesied prophet.

6
  • 1
    nowhere in the Old Testament does it tell us we must believe in the New Testament (not a great argument). Isn't kindness and repentance actions? LDS do believe Joseph was prophesied in the bible, do you believe all prophets are prophesied before hand? Was Agabus prophesied? How do other bible verses (Matthew 7:21. James 2: 14-19. Revelation 20: 12-13) fall into this theology?
    – depperm
    Mar 29 at 10:43
  • You don't have to believe in Agabus to be saved - Jesus and Joseph are different than the Prophets of the OT. Furthermore, Jesus filled 50 - 300 OT prophesies - give me even 10 to predict Joseph, as they are setting him above the stature of the OT prophets - doesn't he deserve some prediction? Lastly, none of the OT prophets fundamentally changed how you worship God or the belief system; Jesus and Joseph did. If you could cite some verses where Joseph is predicted, I will put them in my answer. Mar 29 at 15:07
  • 1
    No but he was a un-prophesied prophet. wouldn't 1-2 be plenty, why 10 (seems arbitrary)? Who says he is above OT prophets (citation/source)? Did all the OT have prophecies of them (is this even a requirement)? none of the OT prophets fundamentally changed how you worship God or the belief system... Moses?
    – depperm
    Mar 29 at 15:42
  • Sorry I think I was a bit vague - Jesus is above the OT prophets as being literally God, who is "greater than man" (Job 33:12). 10 is in fact arbitrary - I want any at all. Moses did change it - however, it was Judaism before and after Moses, albeit with more laws. However, Jesus, while being a Jew, created a separate worship, showing that God is three-in-one: I would call this a pretty big change (was hinted at in OT but not enough to warrant a pre-Christ Christianity). Lastly, by claiming that he must also be believed in, Joseph seperated himself from any OT prophets, just as Jesus did. Mar 29 at 16:12
  • 1
    he claimed he should be believed like any prophet, I don't know of any place where Joseph claims he must be believed in (like Jesus). prophecies of Joseph focus on bible only. you might want to reference spirit world which may align with heaven/hell as you understand it, though even in quoted article there are bible verses which LDS believe to support this belief. No, only edit the answer if you feel like it answers the question better
    – depperm
    Mar 29 at 16:23
1

The gospel in the New Testament is very simple and does not need to insert other humans into it, or make several distinctions on 'kinds of salvation'. There is only one salvation, through one person. It excludes everyone except Jesus (the long awaited Messiah) who was 'born unto us' as a sacrifice, to atone for our sins in his death and rise again in order to represent his prefect obedience to the law on our behalf, so that we are considered sinless, even though we are not. This is a new kind of righteousness that is 'by faith' in Him, not by our good works.

In this way Jesus acts as our only 'high priest forever', making sinners perfect even when they are not forever. Salvation is therefore based on declaring sinners perfectly righteous under God's law, through their faith in Jesus, as a sacrifice made for them for this purpose. Salvation is thus simply averting death, hell and condemnation and instead receiving eternal life, communion with God, the Holy Spirit and even the whole universe working to our benefit, due to our perfect standing before the Father. This makes each Christian a Royal King and Priest themselves! How can a royal priest need someone else? There is, therefore, no need of someone pretending to be 'royal' or 'holy', to those already made royal and holy by Christ.

Salvation, though simple, and in Christ alone, is a great salvation! It can't be mired by inserting a human along side of Christ without making a high handed provocation of the wrath of God. Insinuating faith in someone, in addition to Christ (for either 'full' salvation or 'partial' salvation or whatever new kind of salvation invented by humans) -and insisting on it, even as God's Spirit convicts otherwise- is in fact what the New Testament describes as 'blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, for it tries to shift the glory of Christ aside, to make room for a bag of worms, for who Christ died (i.e. a human).

In summary, salvation is forgiveness and justification in Christ, there is no other kind of salvation:

He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification. Rom 4:25 NIV

The uniqueness of faith in Christ 'only', for our salvation, is on almost every page of the New Testament but for the purpose at hand here is a clear proof text:

5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people. 1 Tim 2:5

It is important to note that Paul himself, after having preached no additional condition to salvation, other than faith in Christ only, excluded faith in himself as a necessary condition for full salvation in Christ. This is important when reviewing the big claims subsequent humans have made of themselves. Not only did he exclude himself but everyone who would follow him, even angels from heaven.

But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God's curse! Gal 1:8 NIV

So clearly from a New Testament view any Apostle, Angel, Latter day prophet, or anyone else that insinuates the need to believe in them for full salvation, other than Christ alone is to be viewed as eternally condemned, or under God's curse.

1

OP: From the perspective of Christians not affiliated with the LDS Church, are there any inconsistencies between the LDS concept of salvation and what the Bible teaches about salvation?

Given that LDS believes that God the Father and Jesus Christ are two distinct beings, then no to answer the OP, the two plans of salvation would have to be different.

In essence, for LDS, it was merely a man, highly evolved they might say, even a god of gods, who died for their sins, but for Christians, it was the Son of God fully human and fully God who died for sins. God who always existed.

He was “in the beginning with the Father, and [is] the Firstborn” (D&C 93:21).

Christians believe Jesus Christ always existed, not just from the beginning of time or creation.

As to salvation, LDS requires earning it.

By this infinite sacrifice [of Christ at Gethsemane], “through [this] Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel” (Articles of Faith 1:3).

Nearly every Christians knows Eph 2:8-9. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Saved, present tense, by grace. Each and every moment of a believer's walk with God through faith in Christ Jesus.

Not of works like "by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel", which of course means what LDS might invent some 1800 years after the eyewitness accounts.

The Bible says believers will be saved, though some as through fire (1 Cor 3:15). The meaning is your works may be burned, but a believer will be saved.

Lastly, LDS believes the Bible is corrupted, as is the church, the Body of Christ. Presumably, this means the whole, which means LDS may cherry pick what helps and doesn't help its cause, much like Marcion of old.

... we turn to the Book of Mormon. Nephi testified that the Bible once “contained the fulness of the gospel of the Lord, of whom the twelve apostles bear record” and that “after [the words] go forth by the hand of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, from the Jews unto the Gentiles, thou seest the formation of that great and abominable church, which is most abominable above all other churches; for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away” (1 Nephi 13:24, 26).

Ironic. They've added requirements to salvation, while saying the Bible that says salvation is by grace through faith is corrupt.

So, to answer the OP, yes, the two are fully different.

OP: are there specific doctrines about salvation taught by the Bible that we can be highly confident about (let's label them as X) and specific doctrines about salvation that the LDS Church is highly confident about (let's label them as Y), such that X and Y are mutually exclusive, meaning they cannot both be true simultaneously?

The doctrine of Christ is mutually exclusive between the two religions. The doctrine of salvation is mutually exclusive between the two religions.

EDIT TO ADD

The Catholic Church after centuries of allowing valid baptisms from any religion as equal to Christian baptism (see Cyprian, Firmillian, Stephen), has finally agreed that words have meanings.

The Catholic Church does not recognize Mormon baptism as valid because, although Mormons and Catholics use the same words, those words have completely unrelated meanings for each religion. The Mormon’s very concept of God is infinitely different from that of Christians—even though they call themselves the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. ... They also believe that Jesus came into existence after the Father, and that the Father and the Son are not one in being. Thus, although they use the phrase “the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,” in their usage this phrase takes on a meaning that is actually polytheistic and pagan rather than trinitarian. -Source-

Valid baptism, valid salvation requires a certain belief. As Christians would question LDS salvation, no doubt LDS question Christian salvation.

6
  • 1
    you don't seem to address the other point of salvation from OP Unconditional or general salvation, that which comes by grace alone without obedience to gospel law, ...This kind of salvation eventually will come to all mankind. That verse about the bible just says things are missing (things are also missing from the Book of Mormon), shouldn't be a large sticking point as there are plenty of things in the New Testament alone which are lacking in details (Jesus teenage years, Jesus in upper room after resurrection, etc)
    – depperm
    Mar 29 at 10:53
  • @depperm sorry typo 1 Cor 3:15. Distinguish between believer and non-believer is love one for another. Joy, gifts of Spirit. As to missing, there is nothing salvific that is missing in our Bible. There are unimportant things not written. Don't make things up because you don't know what they had for breakfast. John 20:31 Acts 21:25 Rom 9:33 Act 13:39, etc
    – SLM
    Mar 29 at 15:20
  • 1
    so things are missing, but you are 100% confident nothing missing matters (how do we know things not included aren't important? this isn't to say not to disbelieve everything or to doubt, but to take caution in believing everything from a source with known holes-things contained are important/truth, shouldn't exclude that missing content might've also had truth)? John 20:31 is about belief not salvation. for LDS, it was merely a man is false statement.
    – depperm
    Mar 29 at 15:48
  • Merely a man though highly evolved is what I said; I might even add a god you believe. Your faith in Joseph Smith is far stronger than my faith in the NT, the apostles endowed with the Spirit to tell the truth and write it down. Congratulations. I mentioned the verses, these things are written so you might believe and have life. No mention of except you need to believe dogma and explanations that come centuries after the fact.
    – SLM
    Mar 29 at 16:40
  • 1
    Agree with @depperm - Latter-day Saints definitely do not consider Jesus merely a man. He is referred to as God on the very first page of the Book of Mormon, and many times thereafter. Re No mention of except you need to believe dogma and explanations that come centuries after the fact - this would be an argument that the 4th & 5th century creeds are unnecessary, so it's playing both sides of the net to say Latter-day Saints aren't Christian because they reject those creeds. Apr 6 at 15:25
0

Most definitely. According to the Bible we are saved by grace according to Ephesians 2:8-9, "For by grace you have been saved (past tense) through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; vs9, not as a result of works, that no one should boast.

This leaves out the possibility of self-achieved salvation, and no reason for boasting. By contrast the following is from the BoM. 2 Nephi 25:23, "For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, AFTER ALL WE CAN DO." Notice vs24, "And, notwithstanding we believe in Christ, we keep the law of Moses, and look forward with steadfastness unto Christ, until the law shall be fulfilled."

Now, I am aware that some Mormons read this verse in the sense that Nephi is telling us, "all we can do is believe in Christ." The following site outlines "all you can do." https://www.namb.net/apologetics/resource/mormon-plan-of-salvation/

The following was posted on Stack Exchange about 9 years ago on this subject; According to Mormonism, how does a person get saved?

16
  • 2
    How do you jump to most definitely when your first statement seems in line with Mr McConkie's Unconditional or general salvation, that which comes by grace alone without obedience to gospel law, consists in the mere fact of being resurrected.
    – depperm
    Mar 25 at 10:55
  • 2
    An explanation from an LDS perspective on the "all we can do" is churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2015/04/… (We must understand that “after” does not equal “because.”) or if you want an apologetic response: fairlatterdaysaints.org/archive/publications/…
    – depperm
    Mar 25 at 11:00
  • 2
    Sola fide is a perniciously false doctrine. Not only does this egregious misreading of Ephesians 2 flatly contradict the plain words of Christ, of other Apostles, and of Paul himself at other points, it also has some rather horrific real-world consequences: sola fide logically implies antinomianism, which even Martin Luther reluctantly admitted.
    – Mason Wheeler
    Mar 26 at 15:17
  • 2
    Hold to the Rod's comment was made (I believe) so that people know to take it with a grain of salt, not everything in the book is doctrine, it is McConkie's opinion. There is still truth in the book (like many books), but many quote books as doctrine for the LDS when they are not. 2 Nephi can be linked to James 2:14-26
    – depperm
    Mar 28 at 11:37
  • 2
    @Mr.Bond Repeating the exact same verses with the exact same bad interpretation does nothing to answer a claim that the interpretation is wrong in light of other points, when you do nothing whatsoever to address the other points. Matthew 7:21. James 2: 14-19. Revelation 20: 12-13. All of these completely contradict sola fide, and the first comes from Christ himself, so we must either condemn Paul as a heretic, or come up with a better interpretation of Ephesians 2. And I don't think Paul was a heretic.
    – Mason Wheeler
    Mar 28 at 19:37

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .