Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: QUESTION ULTIMATELY ANSWERED! (Are Mormons Christians?)
From: <HISWJH@BYUVM.BITNET>
Date: Sunday, 27 Sep 1992 11:25:38 MDT
Organization: Brigham Young University

Tony's post has let the cat out of the bag.  To be a real Christian
it is not enough to believe in Christ, you must also accept
the Protestant doctrine of salvation by faith alone.  Thus,
as I predicted, the working definition of the anti-Mormons
would exclude many Catholics, Orthodox, etc.  But let's
turn for a moment to the question of what the Bible
really teaches about Faith and Works.
(I do appreciate Tony begrugingly admitting Mormons
into        the Christian fold!  Thanks, Tony!)

Some Protestants claim that the true Biblical doctrine is
that mankind is saved, in the words of Martin Luther, by "faith
alone".  They then condemn Mormons, because we believe that
Mankind is saved by a combination of faith and works.  I would
like to present five challenges to those believing in salvation
by faith alone.


Challenge 1-  In reality, even if the "faith alone"
interpretation is right (which I deny) there are still no grounds
to condemn Mormons, since Mormons also believe in salvation
through faith and in being born again.  If a Mormon is born
again, and then mistakenly goes on to perform good works,
does that make that Mormon any less saved than, say, an
evangelical Christian who is born again and then commits
adultery.  Both have sinned, but both have been saved.  What's
the difference?  I, as a Mormon, have been born again -- can
anyone prove that I have not?  I now mistakenly choose to go
on and perform superfluous good works.  Cannot Christ's
atonement cover my "sin" of doing extra good works?   But the
Mormon doctrinal difference with some Protestant
denominations over salvation is that those Protestants
proclaim salvation by faith ALONE, while Mormons believe, as
the Bible teaches, that both faith and works are necessary for
salvation.  Let me turn to just a few Biblical examples
confirming the LDS position.


Challenge 2-  I challenge anyone to show a passage
where Christ states that we are saved by faith and/or grace
alone.  If it is such a central concept of the Gospel, why didn't
Christ state it?  Christ indeed talks about the importance of
faith, but never does he say it is supreme or even sufficient
for salvation.  Why did Christ go on extensively about good
works, if all we need to do is believe in him to be saved?  Why
did he say, "Not all who say to me, Lord, Lord, will enter into
the kingdom of the heavens, rather those who do the will of my
Father who is in the heavens." (Mt. 7:21)  Why did Christ say
"For the Son of Man is about to come in the glory of his Father
with his angels, and then reward everyone according to his
deeds." (Mt. 16:27), and "If you love me, you will keep my
commandments." (Jn. 14:15)  Is Christ here trying to trick us
into believing that we should obey his commandments and do
good works?  These are only a few statements of the Lord on
these matters.  Should not Paul be interpreted on the basis of
what Jesus said, rather than reinterpreting the words of Jesus
to make them fit with a misreading of Paul?


Challenge 3-  If Paul is indeed preaching that we are
saved by faith alone (a phrase he never used), why did he make
the following statements?  Why does Paul believe that in the
day of judgement God "will render unto everyone according to
his deeds" (Rom. 2:6)  Why is it that "the hearers of the Law
are not just before God; rather the doers of the law will be
justified." (Rom. 2:13)?  In interpreting Paul, how can we
ignore such explicit statements?  Now Paul indeed emphasized
faith in his writings, but did so in a context of his opposition
to the Judaisers in the Church.  That is, he disagreed with
those Jewish Christians who maintain that the Hellenic
Christians must obey the old Jewish Law to be saved.  It is
true that the Law of Moses was fulfilled, and was no longer
necessary for salvation, but this does not apply to the
commandments of Christ.  It seems crystal clear, then, that
Paul's thought as a whole includes works as a necessary part
of salvation.  Why ignore these statements by Paul about
works, and focus only on his statements on faith and grace?


Challenge 4-  How can we ignore the clear testimony of
James (2:14-26), Peter, and John.  James asks, "If someone
says he has faith, but has no works, can his faith save him
[save here is the Greek swsai = sosai, the same word used by
Paul in Eph. 2:8-9]?" (2:14).  James' answer is no, for  "faith
without works is dead" (2:26), because "by works was faith
made perfect." (2:22)  James cannot be clearer.  Faith alone
will not save anyone.  He gives several examples, and
concludes, with language as explicit as possible (in contrast to
the supposed implication of PaulUs language) "You see then that
man is justified by works, and not by faith ALONE." (2:24).  "Not
by faith ALONE."  How can it be more clear?

You must have a combination of faith and
works.  Is the letter of James somehow less a part of
scriptures than the writings of Paul?  That seems to be the
only solution if we wish to maintain the doctrine of salvation
by faith alone.  Indeed, Martin Luther was so opposed to the
doctrines of the book of James (because they contradicted his
invented doctrine of salvation by faith alone) that he wrote
that "keyn rechte Apostolisch Epistel ist = it is not a true
Apostolic letter", and considered removing it from the
Lutheran Bible.  Peter also taught that "the Father ... judges
according to the works of each person." (1 Pet. 1:17)  John
agreed that, "the dead were judged by their works as written
in the scrolls." (Rev. 20:12)    Given the fact that Paul and
Jesus make similar statements, it seems clear that the
doctrine of the New Testament is that mankind is saved by a
combination of faith and works.


Challenge 5- Note, finally, that nowhere in the Bible
does it state that mankind is saved by faith alone .  Martin
Luther added the word alone .  The Bible does indeed state we
are saved by faith, but it also states we are saved by a number
of other things as well.  It is simply illogical for some
Protestants to take one element of the salvation process from
the Bible -- in this case faith -- and declare it supreme over
all others.  Take these passages, for example:  "we are saved by
hope" (Rom. 8:24); "baptism now saves us" (1 Pet. 3:21); "he
that endures to the end shall be saved" (Mt. 24:13); "And
[Christ] having been made perfect, became the cause of eternal
salvation to all who obey Him." (1 Heb. 5:9).  Are we to assume
that we are saved by hope, baptism, enduring to the end, or
obedience alone ?  No; rather that we are saved by a
combination of faith, good works, hope, baptism, obedience,
and enduring to the end.  This, of course, is precisely what
Mormons believe.


How, then, are we to understand Eph. 2:8-9.  In the LDS
interpretation, Luther used the word alone to modify the wrong
noun.  "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this
is not on your own, but a gift of God; not through works alone,
lest anyone should boast."  Thus Paul is not saying that "by
faith [alone] you are save, and not through [any] works [at all],"
as Martin Luther read the text, but rather "you are saved by
faith, and not by works [alone]."  This interpretation does no
injustice to the grammar of the text, and makes it compatible
with all the other scriptures in the New Testament.  This is
precisely the LDS position.  How can our critics say it is
unbiblical?  It may not agree with their reading of the Bible,
but it certainly a legitimate and logical way to interpret the
scriptures.


Thus it seems that those Protestants who maintain the
doctrine of salvation by faith alone believe only part of the
Bible (some passages from Paul), while Mormons believe in all
of the Bible.