Evangelicals And The Celestial Kingdom

[prisonchaplain]

Professor Stephen E. Robinson (BYU, Ancient Scriptures) makes the following statement in the book How Wide the Divide:

The LDS believe there will be millions, even billions of good souls who will come from the east and the west to sit down with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the celestial kingdom of heaven (Mt. 8:11)--including, in my opinion, a very large percentage of Evangelicals. (bold emphasis mine)

Do you agree? Comments?

[Traveler]

Originally posted by prisonchaplain@Jan 6 2006, 11:29 PM

Professor Stephen E. Robinson (BYU, Ancient Scriptures) makes the following statement in the book How Wide the Divide:

The LDS believe there will be millions, even billions of good souls who will come from the east and the west to sit down with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the celestial kingdom of heaven (Mt. 8:11)--including, in my opinion, a very large percentage of Evangelicals.  (bold emphasis mine)

Do you agree?  Comments?

←

I agree. In essence it is one of the prime reason we build temples, believe in doing "work for the dead" and look forward to the 1,000 years of Christ on earth. It is my personal belief that not one person that desires to live with G-d in his kingdom will be excluded. To be honest my friend the LDS doctrine on this subject is the only doctrine that I know of that believes this. All others will exclude somebody that is left without the knowledge of something at no fault of their own.

The Traveler

[Aristotle]

I voted yes, with the majority.

In the next life, I look forward to telling many of the evangelicals who [falsely] claimed that Mormons aren't Christians, "I told ya so!" ;-)

[prisonchaplain]

Professor Stephen E. Robinson (BYU, Ancient Scriptures) makes the following statement in the book How Wide the Divide: The LDS believe there will be millions, even billions of good souls who will come from the east and the west to sit down with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the celestial kingdom of heaven (Mt. 8:11)--including, in my opinion, a very large percentage of Evangelicals.  (bold emphasis mine) Do you agree? Comments?

TRAVELER ANSWERS: I agree. In essence it is one of the prime reason we build temples, believe in doing "work for the dead" and look forward to the 1,000 years of Christ on earth. It is my personal belief that not one person that desires to live with G-d in his kingdom will be excluded. To be honest my friend the LDS doctrine on this subject is the only doctrine that I know of that believes this. All others will exclude somebody that is left without the knowledge of something at no fault of their own.

←

Now let me paraphrase and read between the lines, to see if I understand Prof. Robinson and the Traveler correctly. Prof. Robinson has become good friends with evangelical scholar, Prof. Blomberg (Denver Seminary). Additionally, he has consumed enough evangelical writing, that he "knows the language." Ultimately, he's convinced--and here the Traveler concurs--that most evangelicals, because of their hunger to serve God and love people, perhaps in the life to come, will respond favorably to the offer of conversion, which will be provided as a result of a baptism for the dead done here. Have I understood correctly?

I have a short comment about salvation, and this issue of "what if they did not know?" First, there is no doubt that Mormonism neatly solves this difficult question in a way no other faith does. On the other hand, evangelicalism may be more nuanced than most believe. Yes, there are some who say, no way but Jesus...if you did not know, you were not predestined or chosen. However, many others, myself included, suggest that there may be more hope than that. My personal experience came when someone close to me committed suicide. What made this especially confusing for me spiritually was that he had come to my church the week before, and had made a confession of faith...this totally out of the blue. So, was he truly saved? Did he "endure to the end?" Or, did he just go through this act to give me hope and make me feel better? I prayed about it, and after about three weeks got my answer: God is just.

So...is he in heaven or not? GOD IS JUST. Is he in hell? GOD IS JUST. In other words, do I trust God? Do I trust this loved one to him? On the Day of Judgment there will be no objections. All will agree that God was just and merciful. Furthermore, Romans 1 suggests that there is a general revelation of God that all have access to. Perhaps we'll be judged by how we respond to what we know?

Granted...Mormonism's answers are easier. But are they true? What I know for sure is that God is TRUE. Jesus is TRUE. For now, that's good enough for me.

[Traveler]

Originally posted by prisonchaplain@Jan 7 2006, 02:27 PM

--that most evangelicals, because of their hunger to serve God and love people, perhaps in the life to come, will respond favorably to the offer of conversion, which will be provided as a result of a baptism for the dead done here.  Have I understood correctly?

I have a short comment about salvation, and this issue of "what if they did not know?"  First, there is no doubt that Mormonism neatly solves this difficult question in a way no other faith does. 

←

I give this as my opinion on this matter of salvation. That is that it is not so much about what you know but what you commit or as LDS are taught - covenant. The choice is to covenant with G-d or to reject his covenants. I really believe that those that desire to covenant with G-d will receive all his covenants. G-d's plan of salvation is not a respecter of persons but insures that all have the same chance to accept the covenants of salvation - no exceptions for time or place or anything else that separates us in mortality.

The Traveler

[Ray]

I answered “Yes”, with the following understanding.

While the term “evangelical” has come to be understood as a reference to people of particular religious denominations, anyone with the authority or ability to preach or deliver a message to others can be considered to be evangelical.

Also, we in the “LDS” church often understand the term “evangelical” to be a reference to the duty of a Patriarch in the Church, as he gives what is known as a “Patriarchal Blessing” to a member of the Church. And with that understanding, I consider each Father to have the duty to be evangelical, or to be a Patriarch, to his family.

[Justlooking]

Luk 9:46 Then there arose a reasoning among them, which of them should be greatest. 47 And Jesus, perceiving the thought of their heart, took a child, and set him by him, 48 And said unto them, Whosoever shall receive this child in my name receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me receiveth him that sent me: for he that is least among you all, the same shall be great.

[prisonchaplain]

Originally posted by Ray@Jan 9 2006, 04:59 PM

I answered “Yes”, with the following understanding. ...

But Ray, me thinks Prof. Robinson was speaking of Assemblies of God, Baptist, Presbyterian, Methodist, Evangelical Free, Salvation Army, Christian Missionary Alliance, Nazarene, Church of God, Church of Christ, Community of Christ, Seventh Day Adventist, etc.

Do you think these kinds of evangelicals will be numerous in the Celestial Kingdom?

[Ray]

Okay, then my answer is still Yes, as long as those people who are now called “Evangelicals” later receive all of the ordinances which our Lord requires everyone to accept in order to enter the kingdom of God.

And btw, I define an “ordinance” as an order or law which is given or decreed, and in this case it would be our Lord who is stating what is required to enter the kingdom of God.

Or in other words, in this case, our Lord has decreed that a man cannot enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and of the Spirit, meaning that a man must be baptized by someone who has the power or authority of the Spirit or Holy Ghost to baptize him and confirm him as a member in the kingdom of God.

And btw, the Holy Ghost will confirm that we are a member in the kingdom of God when we first enter the kingdom of God and as long as we endure in the kingdom of God.

I’d have to read the full context of Professor Robinson’s quote to understand what he meant or was trying to say, but since I’m sure he knows that we must accept our Lord’s decrees to be able to enter and remain in the kingdom of God, I will now believe that he probably meant that many men or people who are now adherents of those other religions will someday come to know and accept more truth about what our Lord requires from them, perhaps still using some of the words they learned even after they have accepted more of the truth.

Or in other words, while many of us may now use certain words to distinguish other people in other religions, those distinctions only indicate how much certain people know about the will and decrees of our Lord.

Or in other words, there is nothing preventing people who were once “Evangelicals” and are now on the other side of the veil from believing they are still “Evangelicals” when they learn and accept more of the ordinances of our Lord, aside from knowing that the word “Evangelical” is a word that they don’t need to use anymore.

[mountainrider]

I was one of the few that apparently said "No". I believe the scripture that says (in effect) that your thoughts, ideas, personality, beliefs etc (my interpretation of the scripture) will carry over with you into the next life. I think there are going to be many who still will choose not to believe that Mormons are Christians and that they have sole custody of the definition of a "Christian". when they say "I am saved" I believe that they are right as far as their definition of "saved" goes. LDS believe in salvation as the "Celestial Kingdom" while Evangelicals' salvation means "living with Christ" again, which they can do, more or less, in the Terrestrial Kingdom.

Earth life is a probationary state and we will be judged according to what we do on the earth. The bible dictionary says:

It is apparent that if God rewards everyone according to the deeds done in the body, the term heaven as intended for man’s eternal home must include more kingdoms than one.

so, why would the millenium be spent doing work for those who lived on the earth when the restored gospel was on it in its fullness but rejected it? I believe it won't. I believe the millenium will be spent doing work for those millions or billions who lived on the earth when the gospel was not on it or who lived in areas of the earth without access to the restored gospel not for stubborn evangelicals who rejected the Book of Mormon and the restored gospel because they believed the propaganda put out by other so-called "Christian" religions regarding the LDS church.

[prisonchaplain]

I was one of the few that apparently said "No". ... I believe the millenium will be spent doing work for those millions or billions who lived on the earth when the gospel was not on it or who lived in areas of the earth without access to the restored gospel not for stubborn evangelicals who rejected the Book of Mormon and the restored gospel because they believed the propaganda put out by other so-called "Christian" religions regarding the LDS church.

Perhaps I"m biased. I vote for Professor Robinson's optimism.

"So-called Christian?" OUCH

[mountainrider]

<div class='quotemain'>

I was one of the few that apparently said "No". ... I believe the millenium will be spent doing work for those millions or billions who lived on the earth when the gospel was not on it or who lived in areas of the earth without access to the restored gospel not for stubborn evangelicals who rejected the Book of Mormon and the restored gospel because they believed the propaganda put out by other so-called "Christian" religions regarding the LDS church.

Perhaps I"m biased. I vote for Professor Robinson's optimism.

"So-called Christian?" OUCH

yes, so-called Christian. I don't think it is very Christian of churches to bad talk and put out lying propaganda and actively teach in their churches that a certain religion isn't Christian because it doesn't fit their personal definition of "Christian". I don't think Christ himself would do something like that.

[prisonchaplain]

Prisonchaplain said: Perhaps I"m biased. I vote for Professor Robinson's optimism.

Comment on my own comment: I didn't actually vote--I honored my own "lds only" rule.

"So-called Christian?" OUCH

yes, so-called Christian. I don't think it is very Christian of churches to bad talk and put out lying propaganda and actively teach in their churches that a certain religion isn't Christian because it doesn't fit their personal definition of "Christian". I don't think Christ himself would do something like that.

Now, I know you're fairly new in these parts (imagine a truly hideous phony southern, small-town sherriff-like accent), but we had a different string here on what defines an "anti-Mormon." It was a very small minority indeed that argued that all non-LDS are anti-Mormons. So, I'm curious. Do you? Do you believe that all evangelicals are anti-Mormons? Or, perhaps you're simply painting with a broad brush?

[Laureltree]

I voted yes, with the majority.

In the next life, I look forward to telling many of the evangelicals who [falsely] claimed that Mormons aren't Christians, "I told ya so!" ;-)

Thats christ like Not Silly.......I look forward to sharing the gospel with them, it will give them the opportunity to choose to accept it or not. I think when we all get to heaven there will be something for each of us to learn that we thought we might already know.

[mountainrider]

<div class='quotemain'>

Prisonchaplain said: Perhaps I"m biased. I vote for Professor Robinson's optimism.

Comment on my own comment: I didn't actually vote--I honored my own "lds only" rule.

"So-called Christian?" OUCH

yes, so-called Christian. I don't think it is very Christian of churches to bad talk and put out lying propaganda and actively teach in their churches that a certain religion isn't Christian because it doesn't fit their personal definition of "Christian". I don't think Christ himself would do something like that.

Now, I know you're fairly new in these parts (imagine a truly hideous phony southern, small-town sherriff-like accent), but we had a different string here on what defines an "anti-Mormon." It was a very small minority indeed that argued that all non-LDS are anti-Mormons. So, I'm curious. Do you? Do you believe that all evangelicals are anti-Mormons? Or, perhaps you're simply painting with a broad brush?

Of course I don't think all evangelicals are anti-mormons and I never even used that phrase. Almost every one I have met has been a very nice person and we share alot of the same beliefs and standards. However, I have met and talked with ALOT of evangelicals and I would say that.....oh......about 99% of them believe that mormons aren't christians, that it is blasphemy to "add" to the "perfect" bible and that the mormon church is a "cult". Those ideas come from teachings that are actively taught in many churches, both protestant and evangelical. I had a stack of literature on my mission that talked specifically and negatively about mormons from many different churches that we used for comic relief from time to time. I guess, yeah, sometimes I do paint with a semi-broad brush but it is based on many personal experiences.

[prisonchaplain]

Of course I don't think all evangelicals are anti-mormons and I never even used that phrase.

No, of course you didn't. You used the phrase "so-called Christians." When asked to clarify, you said you meant it, and explained some encounters you had with people that most here would have defined as anti-Mormons. Most Christians, evangelical or not, would find the phrase "so-called Christian" even more abrasive than anti-Mormon.

Almost every one (evangelical) I have met has been a very nice person and we share alot of the same beliefs and standards. However, I have met and talked with ALOT of evangelicals and I would say that.....oh......about 99% of them believe that mormons aren't christians, that it is blasphemy to "add" to the "perfect" bible and that the mormon church is a "cult".

Yes, evangelicals do believe that the canon is basically closed, and that if modern day prophets should arise, their words would be judged according to Scripture, rather than Scripture being enlightened by the revelations.

As for the word "cult," evangelicals use it to describe religious systems that use Christian nomenclature, but who have a theology that is quite outside the mainstream. From the perspective of the evangelical, that would not be a good thing. However, I believe a Mormon would respond, "Amen--because we've RESTORED the truth."

These ideas need not hinder conversation, nor be discussed with animosity. We're all God-seekers, and we most of us here seek to serve the Jesus Christ of the Bible.

Those ideas come from teachings that are actively taught in many churches, both protestant and evangelical. I had a stack of literature on my mission that talked specifically and negatively about mormons from many different churches that we used for comic relief from time to time. I guess, yeah, sometimes I do paint with a semi-broad brush but it is based on many personal experiences.

As a shameless plug, you might want to stop by the Bookreview section of this site, to see my post concerning the book, "How Wide the Divide?" It's co-authored by to professors of religion, Robinson (BYU, Ancient Scriptures) and Blomberg (Denver Seminary). They have set forth an excellent model of how Mormon/Evangelical conversations should take place, and come to some interesting conclusions.

Peace and love!

[mountainrider]

<div class='quotemain'>

Of course I don't think all evangelicals are anti-mormons and I never even used that phrase.

No, of course you didn't. You used the phrase "so-called Christians." When asked to clarify, you said you meant it, and explained some encounters you had with people that most here would have defined as anti-Mormons. Most Christians, evangelical or not, would find the phrase "so-called Christian" even more abrasive than anti-Mormon.

Almost every one (evangelical) I have met has been a very nice person and we share alot of the same beliefs and standards. However, I have met and talked with ALOT of evangelicals and I would say that.....oh......about 99% of them believe that mormons aren't christians, that it is blasphemy to "add" to the "perfect" bible and that the mormon church is a "cult".

Yes, evangelicals do believe that the canon is basically closed, and that if modern day prophets should arise, their words would be judged according to Scripture, rather than Scripture being enlightened by the revelations.

As for the word "cult," evangelicals use it to describe religious systems that use Christian nomenclature, but who have a theology that is quite outside the mainstream. From the perspective of the evangelical, that would not be a good thing. However, I believe a Mormon would respond, "Amen--because we've RESTORED the truth."

These ideas need not hinder conversation, nor be discussed with animosity. We're all God-seekers, and we most of us here seek to serve the Jesus Christ of the Bible.

Those ideas come from teachings that are actively taught in many churches, both protestant and evangelical. I had a stack of literature on my mission that talked specifically and negatively about mormons from many different churches that we used for comic relief from time to time. I guess, yeah, sometimes I do paint with a semi-broad brush but it is based on many personal experiences.

As a shameless plug, you might want to stop by the Bookreview section of this site, to see my post concerning the book, "How Wide the Divide?" It's co-authored by to professors of religion, Robinson (BYU, Ancient Scriptures) and Blomberg (Denver Seminary). They have set forth an excellent model of how Mormon/Evangelical conversations should take place, and come to some interesting conclusions.

Peace and love!

sorry, I didn't mean to sound hostile and I really am not.

Thanks but no thanks on How Wide the Divide. I have read it and I am not a fan of Robinson. I think Robinson is WAY of base as a Mormon on alot of things.

[Josie]

PC, I agreee with you that G-d and Jesus Christ are just, and I think when the time of judgement comes, we are all going to accept judgement by them, because when that time comes we are going to see our life's span and already know what our judgement is.

I think that those that were reaaly awful people here will be grateful that they are not in the Celestial Kingdom, because they will be too embarrassed and ashamed of their lives here to want to be in G-d's presence. There are going to be alot of lds that won't be there either because they failed to keep their covenants and do what they knew they were suppose too.

I also believe that Christ will provide for all to be taught his gospel, the living and the dead, and that those that truly accept it and Jesus as their Savior will have the opportunity to have all things made well with them. I believe that we will be judged on how much of the truth we had provided to us and how much we accepted and committed ourselves when we were presented with the rest of it. I don't think there are going to be LDS, Baptists, etc. in heaven, I believe we will be of Christ's church or we will not.

I believe there are good people in all religions as well as bad and there are good and bad people that have no religion at all. G-d and Jesus Christ only know our hearts and what we truly know and love them and have enough faith in them to trust them to judge all of us fair and equally. To be honest, I am glad to know that it is them judging us and not us judging us...

[allen]

Baptism into the LDS church is required for entrance into the Celestial Kingdom. People who were Evangelicals in mortality but who accepted their proxy baptism are no longer Evangelicals, they are LDS. Thus, by definition only LDS will be in the Celestial Kingdom, including many who were Evangelicals during their mortal life. The statement as given referred to Evangelicals being in the Celestial Kingdom, implying they had gotten to the Celestial Kingdom without baptism.

[prisonchaplain]

sorry, I didn't mean to sound hostile and I really am not.

No problem. Quite often the person we're about to talk to gets our left over feelings from our last similar conversation.

Thanks but no thanks on How Wide the Divide. I have read it and I am not a fan of Robinson. I think Robinson is WAY of base as a Mormon on alot of things.

How so? As an outsider, I thought I learned a lot from the book. Blomberg (the evangelical) might not have pleased all evangelicals, but he represented mainstream thinking quite well. What were some of the key difficulties you had with Robinson?

[mountainrider]

It is sometimes difficult on this board to tell who is actually LDS on here and who is not but it is a little disturbing that there are so many that don't understand basic LDS doctrine, including Brother Robinson. The Doctrine and Covenants is quite clear about who will be where.

The Sunday School Teaching Manuaul Lesson 8, obviously put together and approved by the leadership of the church, entitled The Three Kingdoms of Glory, has a table that explains who will be assigned to what glory:

WHO WILL INHERIT TELESTIAL GLORY? (D&C 76:81–83, D&C 76:98–103)

Those who:

a. Reject the gospel (D&C 76:82, D&C 76:101).

b. Reject the testimony of Jesus (D&C 76:82–83, D&C 76:101).

c. Are liars, sorcerers, adulterers, and whoremongers (D&C 76:103).

WHO WILL INHERIT TERRESTRIAL GLORY? (D&C 76:71–80)

Those who:

a. Reject the gospel in this life but receive it in the spirit world (D&C 76:71–74).

b. Are honorable but are blinded by the craftiness of men (D&C 76:75).

c. Are not valiant in the testimony of Jesus (D&C 76:79).

HOW CAN WE INHERIT CELESTIAL GLORY? (D&C 76:50–70)

We must:

a. Receive the testimony of Jesus (D&C 76:51).

b. Be baptized by one with priesthood authority (D&C 76:51).

c. Keep the commandments (D&C 76:52).

d. Receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (D&C 76:52–53).

e. Overcome the world by faith (D&C 76:53).

f. Be made perfect through the Atonement of Jesus Christ (D&C 76:69).

WHO ELSE WILL INHERIT CELESTIAL GLORY? (D&C 137:7–10)

Those who:

g. Die without a knowledge of the gospel but “would have received it with all their hearts” (D&C 137:7–9).

And those who:

h. “Die before they arrive at the years of accountibility” (D&C 137:10).

a. under the topic of Terrestrial Glory is the most pertinent to this conversation. It is all in D&C 76.

Now, i don't think there are many evangelicals walking around America that have never heard of the Book of Mormon, never heard of Joseph Smith, never heard of modern revelation, never heard of the organization of the LDS church etc.

[Guest Syble]

Now, i don't think there are many evangelicals walking around America that have never heard of the Book of Mormon, never heard of Joseph Smith, never heard of modern revelation, never heard of the organization of the LDS church etc.

Maybe not, but have they heard about the Mormons, Joseph Smith, modern relvelation, or the Organization of the LDS church through the Missionaries and the Holy Ghost? Or just bashers? It will make a difference when they get to the other side. If they haven't had a proper chance to know what they were turning down, then they will not be held accountable and will be given the chance. Only the Lord knows the hearts of men, and if they would have accepted it if they heard it in the right conditions, then they will indeed have a chance to reach the Celestial Kingdom.

[mountainrider]

Now, i don't think there are many evangelicals walking around America that have never heard of the Book of Mormon, never heard of Joseph Smith, never heard of modern revelation, never heard of the organization of the LDS church etc.

Maybe not, but have they heard about the Mormons, Joseph Smith, modern relvelation, or the Organization of the LDS church through the Missionaries and the Holy Ghost? Or just bashers? It will make a difference when they get to the other side. If they haven't had a proper chance to know what they were turning down, then they will not be held accountable and will be given the chance. Only the Lord knows the hearts of men, and if they would have accepted it if they heard it in the right conditions, then they will indeed have a chance to reach the Celestial Kingdom.

yes, i believe they have but that is my opinion. They have heard it and rejected it because of "the philosophies of man" or "the craftiness of men"etc. I agree with what you said. It isn't up to me or anyone other than God to decide whether or not a person has been given adequate opportunity to accept the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. However, I think this is one of the main points of our extensive missionary program so I suspect there will be very few in America (while the restored gospel has been on the earth) that can plead ignorance in front of the judgement bar.

I believe that we will depart this world with the same attitudes, pride, likes and dislikes and spirit as Alma taught it Alma 34:34. So, I believe the opposite of Brother Robinson. I don't think there will be many evangelicals who accept the gospel in the spirit world.

[Guest Syble]

I believe that we will depart this world with the same attitudes, pride, likes and dislikes and spirit as Alma taught it Alma 34:34. So, I believe the opposite of Brother Robinson. I don't think there will be many evangelicals who accept the gospel in the spirit world.

True enough. There are prideful ones everyone. There, in fact, will be a lot of LDS who also will fall short because of all the ones in America, they will be the most accountable and have the most expected from them.

Being that we will be judge by how we judge, I will sprinkle in a little extra mercy towards those whom may or may not have had a good enough chance to hear the gospel. I will pray for them and send love and mercy to them through the Father.

[prisonchaplain]

It is sometimes difficult on this board to tell who is actually LDS on here and who is not but it is a little disturbing that there are so many that don't understand basic LDS doctrine, including Brother Robinson. The Doctrine and Covenants is quite clear about who will be where. The Sunday School Teaching Manuaul Lesson 8, obviously put together and approved by the leadership of the church, entitled The Three Kingdoms of Glory, has a table that explains who will be assigned to what glory:

I'm obviously not qualified to discern who is right here. However, as an outsider with some skills in analyzing religious writings, you've posed an interesting question. I'll rephrase it for my own denomination, so I can more intelligently deal with it:

Which would have more theological weight to it--writings for our Gospel Publishing House (Assemblies of God publisher) Sunday School curriculum, or the writings of one of our brightest theologians at the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary (who are often consulted when doctrinal papers are written)?

So, you cite the teaching manual, and suggest it has more authority than the writings of a Mormon professor who teaches religion at the Church's flagship university. Maybe you are right. However, unless I knew that, I might consider the works of a scholar to be more theologically meaty.

Now, i don't think there are many evangelicals walking around America that have never heard of the Book of Mormon, never heard of Joseph Smith, never heard of modern revelation, never heard of the organization of the LDS church etc.

Obviously, I'm biased here, in favor of the more welcoming interpretation. However, how many evangelicals indeed have actually had the LDS plan of salvation explained to them by LDS representatives who had authority to do so?