Salvation and Grace and Works...can we agree on this?

[prisonchaplain]

First for the stereotypical conversation between evangelicals and LDS:

Evangelical: You LDS got it all wrong. You can't earn your salvation by doing good works!

LDS: Maybe not...but could you at least try...a little???

Too simple, for sure. In reality, we all agree that we must repent, and come to God with nothing but our faith in his promise forgiveness. We also know that the outcome of that forgiveness, and our embrace of the new life, should be good works, and a life lived better.

So, here's my thought...instead of arguing over whether good works is part of "enduring to the end," that leads to salvation, or, that good works is an outcome of salvation--a "fruit" or product of God's grace and redemption, there may be another way to describe it. Good works is our reaction to God's grace.

* Sinner comes to God and repents of her sins.

* God sees the sincerity of the sorrow, and the faith "as a mustard seed," and bestows grace.

* The forgiven soul feels so clean and free and grateful that she cannot help but do good, live pure, and follow Christ in obedience.

* There may be slip ups, to be sure. Forgiveness is again available.

* But life is now pointed towards Glory Land...and ours is a continual RESPONSE to God's grace...a reaction that is compelled by personal purity and a desire to spread God's goodness to others.

[NeuroTypical]

PC, you rock. This is a far superior effort to build bridges than what I usually see when some evangelical is saying "I wanna build a bridge to the Mormons".

A thought or two.

* The forgiven soul feels so clean and free and grateful that she cannot help but do good, live pure, and follow Christ in obedience.

I love the way an evangelical describes being saved. It's so joyful. It reminds me of how I used to feel on Christmas morning when I was 6.

I can only talk about my own experience, and generalize about what others have told me. But for a LDS, we seem to experience this phenomena in different ways. You are big on the term "saved", we tend to be big on the term "converted". Occasionally, I think your term is a better one, as it holds up God's outside action on a soul as the central notion. Whereas 'converted' seems more like a soul has become convinced of a superior arguement, and has changed opinions. With 'converted', we are now convinced of eternal truth, and our conversion may bring with it a dramatic and joyful change in our existence. With 'saved', we are new people starting a new life, and we're also convinced of the truth.

Maybe it's too fine a point to make. Surely, in my own story and those of other LDS, it reaches the joyous climax and change that I've heard evangelicals describe. It's just that we also get a hefty helping of what we should do to build God's kingdom. And although we are freed from our sins via baptism, we remain largely who we were before - our characters and inclinations are still often with us, and we still need to exert effort to follow Christ.

Does any of this make any sense?

LM

[rubondfan2]

First for the stereotypical conversation between evangelicals and LDS:

Evangelical: You LDS got it all wrong. You can't earn your salvation by doing good works!

Which, if one really understands LDS doctrine in this area, is an absolutely correct statement. One cannot do enough good works or righteous deeds to earn their salvation. It's impossible while in mortality. This is why the Atonement is so vitally, in fact essential to our exaltation.

Additionally -- and this a key point that we Latter-Day Saints run into when having a conversation like the one you describe -- "Salvation" in our doctrine equates to "resurrection", which is, in fact a free gift to all of God's children... no requirements of worthiness whatsoever to qualify for that one. "Exaltation", however, is a different story. This term for us equates to "eternal life" with God in the Celestial Kingdom. You've been around the forum for a long time, so I'm sure I'm not telling you anything new here.

And again, to restate, our doctrine is that one cannot earn their way to Exaltation. At the end of the day, it is Christ's atoning sacrifice which bridges the impossible gap between our mortality and the Father's perfection.

LDS: Maybe not...but could you at least try...a little???

This one comes from, in my opinion, what a lot of us Latter-Day Saints run into with the evangelicals with a too simplistic view of the Grace concept. There are many (present company excluded, based on what I have read in your many posts here) who subscribe to what I like to call the "no sweat religion" concept. That is, that once one has given their life over to the Lord, they somehow have some kind of free pass into the Kingdom... hakuna mattatta and all that. In my view, the Lord's profoundly intimate, painful and loving Atonement require one to take "enduring to the end" a bit more seriously than a simple one time pronouncement of faith.

In reality, we all agree that we must repent, and come to God with nothing but our faith in his promise forgiveness. We also know that the outcome of that forgiveness, and our embrace of the new life, should be good works, and a life lived better.

I think in principle we do, in fact "all agree" on this. But, for us Latter-Day Saints, we have New Testament counsel that we should "work out our own salvation with fear and trembling"; and we have Book of Mormon counsel that "it is by grace that we are saved after all we can do". So... for us, when we come to God in repentance, it is not just with faith in his promise of forgiveness, but also with a demonstration that we are in fact changing our lives and behavior (our "works", if you will). The good works is more than a symptom of repentance & forgiveness, but rather, repentance & forgiveness is more of symptom of good works. (I know that's sort of a "which came first, the chicken or the egg" kind of point... but it's how I look at it personally)

* Sinner comes to God and repents of her sins.

* God sees the sincerity of the sorrow, and the faith "as a mustard seed," and bestows grace.

* The forgiven soul feels so clean and free and grateful that she cannot help but do good, live pure, and follow Christ in obedience.

* There may be slip ups, to be sure. Forgiveness is again available.

* But life is now pointed towards Glory Land...and ours is a continual RESPONSE to God's grace...a reaction that is compelled by personal purity and a desire to spread God's goodness to others.

We Latter-Day Saints who are (mistakenly) trying our darnedest to earn our way to Heaven could learn a lot from your bullet points above. I think it's your 4th bullet point which is where a lot of the debate enters in between the two camps. So many evangelicals talk about their being saved by Grace as a one time event that ties back to their singular pronouncement of faith at one point. The concept of ongoing repentance is lost on them. You, however, seem to grasp the concept that repentance is continually necessary, which leads me to ask the question, isn't that an acknowledgement that "works" do, actually play into the equation?

Thanks for reaching out with this question. I look forward to the many comments which I am sure will come forth from others.

Edited October 28, 2010 by rubondfan2

[Traveler]

First for the stereotypical conversation between evangelicals and LDS:

Evangelical: You LDS got it all wrong. You can't earn your salvation by doing good works!

LDS: Maybe not...but could you at least try...a little???

Too simple, for sure. In reality, we all agree that we must repent, and come to God with nothing but our faith in his promise forgiveness. We also know that the outcome of that forgiveness, and our embrace of the new life, should be good works, and a life lived better.

So, here's my thought...instead of arguing over whether good works is part of "enduring to the end," that leads to salvation, or, that good works is an outcome of salvation--a "fruit" or product of God's grace and redemption, there may be another way to describe it. Good works is our reaction to God's grace.

* Sinner comes to God and repents of her sins.

* God sees the sincerity of the sorrow, and the faith "as a mustard seed," and bestows grace.

* The forgiven soul feels so clean and free and grateful that she cannot help but do good, live pure, and follow Christ in obedience.

* There may be slip ups, to be sure. Forgiveness is again available.

* But life is now pointed towards Glory Land...and ours is a continual RESPONSE to God's grace...a reaction that is compelled by personal purity and a desire to spread God's goodness to others.

I have always appreciated discussions with PC. I am not sure to this day if the differences in doctrine concerning salvation are somatic or actual.

The word salvation has the same root meaning as the word salvage. I believe that as we look at the meaning of salvage we can understand what the L-rd is doing and why the term salvation is used in the first place. As we consider a shipwreck (and who would not doubt that mankind is a shipwreck by divine standards) there are two important things to consider:

First – a shipwreck is a ship with hopeless condition of complete and total waste – There is nothing associated with a sunken ship that can complete the intended purpose of that ship and crew and cargo. The ship and all that rest with it are ruined. The ancient term for this condition is abomination – which mean ruined.

Second is the salvage crew. This is the external operation that comes upon the shipwreck to find what is of value and redeem it or separate the value from the non-value and return the valuable stuff to use.

It is this second notion that I see as the problem between LDS and Evangelicals. As I understand the LDS concept – The L-rd by his divine grace has come to salvage the good that is still within us. We must generate and cultivate this “goodness” of ourselves in order for the L-rd to have anything of value to salvage. But without the L-rd to salvage us – like a shipwreck we would remain forever with our good and bad in a state of ruin.

As I understand the Evangelical concepts – The L-rd despises everything associated with the shipwreck of our souls and there is nothing of value and that he will magically transform us making us useful and of value without any of what is us making any contribution.

Now I realize that we can all agree on the grace and goodness of G-d. What I am not sure of – is if Evangelicals can and will accept the grace and goodness inherent in man that is lost in the shipwreck of all un-salvaged individuals. What I am not sure – and I do not mean this to be inflammatory – Without the understanding of inherent goodness of man; I do not know how Evangelicals can obey the “second” commandment to love their un-salvaged fellow man or that they actually believe that G-d loves anything about the un-salvaged of mankind.

The Traveler

[rameumptom]

I think the biggest problem is terminology. We talk past one another.

For example, someone mentioned that "salvation" for LDS means only the resurrection. Well, actually, no. Even Sons of Perdition who have dwelt in mortality will be resurrected, but will not be saved.

Many LDS (and notably Elder Bruce R. McConkie) insist that salvation only means exaltation. So, in such a case, you ask evangelicals if they are saved, and all will say "yes". Meanwhile, Mormons with such a thought on salvation=exaltation, will say "maybe", because they haven't earned it yet.

Sadly, most LDS do not understand that the correct statement comes from Joseph Smith in D&C 76. Even the Telestial gain salvation, which is more than resurrection, it is also being saved from eternal torment and hell, into a kingdom of glory.

When we begin to view all kingdoms of heaven as places where people are saved by the atonement of Christ, only THEN can we begin to understand our own doctrine well enough to discuss it with other Christians.

Many think we have to earn our salvation through works, because salvation only means exaltation to them. But then we are talking past our Christian friends, confusing them to what we really believe. Yes, they are saved. Yes, we are saved. Almost all in the world are saved by Christ - even most non-Christians are saved by his grace. And then he allows us to follow that grace to higher levels of salvation. In D&C 93, we learn that the mortal Christ went from grace to grace, receiving grace for grace, until he obtained a fullness. So it is for us. We receive the level of grace/salvation we are ready to receive at this point. When it is instilled in us, it encourages us to seek a higher level of grace, receiving even more grace in our lives. Obedience is part of the equation to obtain higher levels of grace, but we are not saved by it.

[AndrewCothran]

Since I am not LDS I cannot answer the question but i can comment on it .. PC, in the scenario you are suggesting you have two people who probably should not be having the conversation because they both seem to be quite presumptive and a tad bit rude . ..Of course this is only an example, I understand that, but in truth that is where many misunderstandings begin ,that is, with our own preconceived notions of what is true and what is not about our beliefs , and our approach to one another . I also think terminology is a tremendous stumbling block and takes an enormous amount of patience to overcome ..In regards to Salvation and works they have and are and will forever be mutually exclusive in regards to Salvation,except as fruits of that Grace and Justification wrought through Christs Actual Atonement and the working of the Holy Ghost ..

[prisonchaplain]

A thought or two.

* The forgiven soul feels so clean and free and grateful that she cannot help but do good, live pure, and follow Christ in obedience.

I love the way an evangelical describes being saved. It's so joyful. It reminds me of how I used to feel on Christmas morning when I was 6.

I can only talk about my own experience, and generalize about what others have told me. But for a LDS, we seem to experience this phenomena in different ways. You are big on the term "saved", we tend to be big on the term "converted". Occasionally, I think your term is a better one, as it holds up God's outside action on a soul as the central notion. Whereas 'converted' seems more like a soul has become convinced of a superior arguement, and has changed opinions. With 'converted', we are now convinced of eternal truth, and our conversion may bring with it a dramatic and joyful change in our existence. With 'saved', we are new people starting a new life, and we're also convinced of the truth.

Maybe it's too fine a point to make. Surely, in my own story and those of other LDS, it reaches the joyous climax and change that I've heard evangelicals describe. It's just that we also get a hefty helping of what we should do to build God's kingdom. And although we are freed from our sins via baptism, we remain largely who we were before - our characters and inclinations are still often with us, and we still need to exert effort to follow Christ.

Does any of this make any sense?

LM

It makes wonderful sense to me. Some of my fellow bretheren might try to unpack your thoughts and suggest that you still carry the burden of sin as you strive to earn your salvation. What I see instead is that the urgency you have been taught to live up to your conversion is stronger. We can get "drunk" on our grace and our liberty to the neglect of our response. On the other hand, taken too far, the drive to righteousness can become joyless, and even legalistic. BUT, we have those kinds of Christians in evangelical ranks as well. We agree that grace and righteousness are both true, and so our discussion might well come down to where the balance on emphasis should be.

Having said that, we might also recognize there is this gnat of doctrine that won't quite go away. It's the "which came first the salvation/conversion or the righteousness?" dicussion. My guess is that it won't be quickly solved. On the other hand, if we recognize that evangelicals aren't trying to get away within sin and laziness, and that LDS aren't trying to pay for their own salvation, we'd be 90% ahead of most in these discussions.

[prisonchaplain]

which leads me to ask the question, isn't that an acknowledgement that "works" do, actually play into the equation?

One of our favorite "salvation passages" is 1 John 1:8-9. It basically says that we cannot say we are without sin, so we must instead confess it. Then God will forgive it. We bring this to our unsaved friends and say, see, confess your sins, believe God, become a Christian! AND YET, the passage is first directed, not towards the worldy sinner, but towards the church-going Christian. We too--in fact we first--must confess our sins. And, as the prophets have long declared, judgment does begin in the household of faith.

So, yes, good works must be evident in the life of a Christian. We decry some of the legalism and judgmentalism of past generations. However, the based their standards upon this truth--if we are converted our lives should surely show it!

[prisonchaplain]

Since I am not LDS I cannot answer the question but i can comment on it .. PC, in the scenario you are suggesting you have two people who probably should not be having the conversation because they both seem to be quite presumptive and a tad bit rude . ..Of course this is only an example, I understand that, but in truth that is where many misunderstandings begin ,that is, with our own preconceived notions of what is true and what is not about our beliefs , and our approach to one another . I also think terminology is a tremendous stumbling block and takes an enormous amount of patience to overcome ..In regards to Salvation and works they have and are and will forever be mutually exclusive in regards to Salvation,except as fruits of that Grace and Justification wrought through Christs Actual Atonement and the working of the Holy Ghost ..

Indeed they were a bit rude and over-simple...I meant that to be mildly humorous. If done in real-world, it wouldn't be funny at all...but quite uncomfortable.

What I have come to realize about terminology is that to understand "the other," takes more than a glossary, or bilingual dictionary. It takes on-going conversation, and the willingness to listen, as well as to speak. For us evangelicals, this can be hard, because we want so much to win the sould right now (today is the day of salvation...). If we can learn to slow down, we might be heard better. We might hear a bit ourselves, too. :-)

[AndrewCothran]

Indeed they were a bit rude and over-simple...I meant that to be mildly humorous. If done in real-world, it wouldn't be funny at all...but quite uncomfortable.

What I have come to realize about terminology is that to understand "the other," takes more than a glossary, or bilingual dictionary. It takes on-going conversation, and the willingness to listen, as well as to speak. For us evangelicals, this can be hard, because we want so much to win the sould right now (today is the day of salvation...). If we can learn to slow down, we might be heard better. We might hear a bit ourselves, too. :-)

I agree absolutely ...and i was only talking about the characters actions not you :)

Edited October 28, 2010 by prisonchaplain

[prisonchaplain]

I have always appreciated discussions with PC. I am not sure to this day if the differences in doctrine concerning salvation are somatic or actual. ...

Now I realize that we can all agree on the grace and goodness of G-d. What I am not sure of – is if Evangelicals can and will accept the grace and goodness inherent in man that is lost in the shipwreck of all un-salvaged individuals. What I am not sure – and I do not mean this to be inflammatory – Without the understanding of inherent goodness of man; I do not know how Evangelicals can obey the “second” commandment to love their un-salvaged fellow man or that they actually believe that G-d loves anything about the un-salvaged of mankind.

The Traveler

Before I delve into an answer based on how I interpret your inquiry, let me be sure I have it right...are you questioning whether the doctrine of one heavenly kingdom for believers in God and one hell for those who do not is deficient in its understanding of salvation and grace?

[Traveler]

Before I delve into an answer based on how I interpret your inquiry, let me be sure I have it right...are you questioning whether the doctrine of one heavenly kingdom for believers in God and one hell for those who do not is deficient in its understanding of salvation and grace?

The question deals specifically with what we both could understand as an “unbeliever”. Someone that for whatever reason does not believe in Jesus Christ. What if anything about them is worth loving by G-d and those that do believe? What is loved and what is despised?

I know we love the sinner and despise the sin but is there nothing to be considered in the unbeliever?

The Traveler

[Justice]

With even a cursory reading of Matthew 25 it should be obvious to all Christians that works are part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If you remove works from the Gospel, the Gospel cannot function as intended, it becomes dead, and grace cannot be bestowed upon man. The New Testament is full of verses about doing good to others and looking after each other.

The confusion comes in as the early Apostles try to teach early Christians that the works of the Law of Moses are not required as part of the Law of Christ. If only that one point were understood when reading the New Testament it would dramatically change how people viewed what Christ requires of us.

So, PC, it's not like we need to find a middle ground. Every Christian needs to be anxiously engaged in being a Christian, instead of debating about whether or not we should be following Christ by doing what He did (good works).

He compared our good works to a light:

Matthew 5:

14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.

15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.

16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

There's no discussion about if; it's just assumed in the verse that good works are present in the life of the believer.

D&C 58:

27 Verily I say, men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness;

We have never claimed our works somehow earn us even part of the way to heaven. But, without good works, we can't claim to love God or be Christian.

Here is the popular claim:

John 14:

15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

And worded differently:

Luke 6:

46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?

There are many, many more:

1 John 5:

2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.

3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

Frankly, with all that's in the New Testament about this subject, even including the confusion of the works of the Law of Moses being done away, I honestly wonder how this can even be debated.

Any man or woman claiming to be Christian must also claim in their heart that they desire to keep His commandments. It just doesn't make sense any other way. That's what it means to take His name upon us; that's what is required in order to have the Spirit with us. How can one grow closer to God if he refuses to keep His commandments?

[prisonchaplain]

The question deals specifically with what we both could understand as an “unbeliever”. Someone that for whatever reason does not believe in Jesus Christ. What if anything about them is worth loving by G-d and those that do believe? What is loved and what is despised?

I know we love the sinner and despise the sin but is there nothing to be considered in the unbeliever?

The Traveler

The unbeliever, in mortality, is a sinner...like me. God loves unbelievers. Jesus came for them. We are commanded to show them God's ways and to extend his love. "Love the sinner hate the sin," is no cliche. It is vital truth--core doctrine.

As to how God will judge the unrepentent soul, that is his domain. Protestants and Catholics have our understanding of what eternal damnation entails, and who likely candidates are. The LDS teachings is, of course, much more limited. Still, would you not also want to extend love and hope to someone who today appears to be a Son of Perdition? Do you not hope that, for example, ex-Mormons who become virulent anti-LDS, would publicly recant of their opposition, and even return?

Ours is to work in mortality, and extend what life we can to them. LDS have the added belief that the afterlife offers further opportunity. So, you also make efforts for them. I would think we are all trying to fulfill God's love mission based upon that which has been revealed to us.

[prisonchaplain]

Justice, very few Christians would suggest that good works are an unnecessary component of Christian living. What gets debated is whether those good works are a prequisite of salvation. And, by salvation, we mean initial conversion.

Sometimes we speak of "Accepting Jesus as my Savior and Lord." The second part of that implies that I will, from this point forward obey Jesus. He is now my Lord, so I will do what he says--good works, and aversion from bad deeds.

But again, we see that as a product of conversion.

If I were to admit that conversion primarily means to the terrestial kingdom (with some backbenchers perhaps even going telestial), we might all smile and say "have a nice day...mission accomplished." Of course, I won't do that. On the other hand, I readily admit that the most faithful will receive responsiblities that are "greater" than those who either converted at the last minute, or who were frequently unreliable with spiritual matters.

[Still_Small_Voice]

The most simple way I can explain getting to the Kingdom of God is this way:

Ephesians 2:10 "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them."

Romans Chapter 6

1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?

2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

A Christian author, C. S. Lewis, compared grace and works to the blades of a pair of scissors. Both are necessary. To ask “Are you saved by grace or works?” is like asking “Do you cut with this blade or that one?”

And as Joseph Smith wrote: "Therefore ye are justified of faith and works, through grace, to the end . . ."

In my own words: "We do good works, not because we can be saved on our own efforts, but because that is what Christ has commanded us to do."

[Justice]

And, by salvation, we mean initial conversion.

It is by putting the Laws of Christ into practice that we become converted to Him and His Gospel. Putting those laws into practice in our lives IS "good works."

If one does not practice good works (exercise faith) he can never hope to be converted.

If one does not practice good works (exercise faith) after he is converted, he cannot hope to remain converted.

[prisonchaplain]

If one does not practice good works (exercise faith) he can never hope to be converted.

I would suggest you put the works before the conversion (i.e. the horse before the cart), and it MUST be vice versa. Your statement here is the crux of the debate. We may not be able to reconcile it.

If one does not practice good works (exercise faith) after he is converted, he cannot hope to remain converted.

I would agree with this. Amen.

[rameumptom]

I believe Jesus taught that we can test the doctrines/commandments and see for ourselves if they are from God or not. In this instance, obedience can lead to a testimony. Someone chooses to pray in order to see if God really is there. The Spirit testifies that it is true. The person begins his conversion. In this, we see that a "work" can lead to faith and testimony. However, as PC would probably note, this work does not save us, it only enhances our ability to be converted.

[prisonchaplain]

There is no doubt that the journey to conversion often involves testing the waters by "experimenting" with goodness (godliness). Whether that is prayer or serving meals in a homeless shelter...or even serving on a mission...these activities can all help us see God and gain that sustaining faith--the type that results in conversion.

[Traveler]

The unbeliever, in mortality, is a sinner...like me. God loves unbelievers. Jesus came for them. We are commanded to show them God's ways and to extend his love. "Love the sinner hate the sin," is no cliche. It is vital truth--core doctrine.

As to how God will judge the unrepentent soul, that is his domain. Protestants and Catholics have our understanding of what eternal damnation entails, and who likely candidates are. The LDS teachings is, of course, much more limited. Still, would you not also want to extend love and hope to someone who today appears to be a Son of Perdition? Do you not hope that, for example, ex-Mormons who become virulent anti-LDS, would publicly recant of their opposition, and even return?

Ours is to work in mortality, and extend what life we can to them. LDS have the added belief that the afterlife offers further opportunity. So, you also make efforts for them. I would think we are all trying to fulfill God's love mission based upon that which has been revealed to us.

There are many things I do not understand in your post. I can understand that the unbeliever is a sinner – but why do you say an unbeliever is like you? What is the difference between a believer and an unbeliever? Is not a repentant believer pure and clean before G-d?

The other problem I have is determining what sin to be hated is and what if any are the good works that believing “Christians” and G-d love and honor? It appears that the quote “Well done thou good and faithful servant – enter into my rest” is interpreted as “Nice Try but no cigar; only by my grace will you enter”. The question is – does G-d appreciate and bless for good works in the same manner he dismisses and despises sin?

Also I am not sure I understand the love the sinner hate the sin as a core doctrine. I do not understand how this relates to being a believer and a non-believer. For example, Jesus illustrated the importance between sin and good works and believing and not believing in the parable of the Good Samaritan. To me the symbols are clear between who G-d holds in high esteem when it comes to Believers (priests and Levites) and unbelievers (Samaritans) and sinners (those that think grace alone is all that G-d honors) and non-sinners (those that do good works of compassion of love and kindness).

As I understand the teachings of Christ – It is by grace that we are pardoned of our sins. But it is only by our good works that we are given blessings of appreciation; or as Jesus said, “Treasures in heaven”. It is my honest impression that Evangelicals fully expect to receive whatever Treasures of heaven possible without seeking them or laying them up in store. Is my impression incorrect?

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

There are many things I do not understand in your post. I can understand that the unbeliever is a sinner – but why do you say an unbeliever is like you? What is the difference between a believer and an unbeliever? Is not a repentant believer pure and clean before G-d?

I have yet to meet a Christian of any stripe who has achieved sinless perfection. We strive for that. We do not excuse our failures. But 1 John 1:8 tells me that if I say I am without sin I am a liar, and God is not in me. The difference is that I am no longer bound by sin.

The other problem I have is determining what sin to be hated is and what if any are the good works that believing “Christians” and G-d love and honor? It appears that the quote “Well done thou good and faithful servant – enter into my rest” is interpreted as “Nice Try but no cigar; only by my grace will you enter”. The question is – does G-d appreciate and bless for good works in the same manner he dismisses and despises sin?

Our good works are love offerings to the Savior. Our "pay" will be in the responsiblities we are given in God's kingdom. Further, it will be in the sense that we did well with what we were given by our Sovereign. Who was it that said "a job well done is its own reward?"

Also I am not sure I understand the love the sinner hate the sin as a core doctrine. I do not understand how this relates to being a believer and a non-believer. For example, Jesus illustrated the importance between sin and good works and believing and not believing in the parable of the Good Samaritan. To me the symbols are clear between who G-d holds in high esteem when it comes to Believers (priests and Levites) and unbelievers (Samaritans) and sinners (those that think grace alone is all that G-d honors) and non-sinners (those that do good works of compassion of love and kindness).

Jesus used the Samaritan to shock his Jewish audience into understanding that their status and titles were no guarantee that they pleased God. He repeatedly condemned the over-emphasis on ritual, to the neglect of the widows and orphans, etc. I would not interpret the parable to mean that those who care for the poor will go to heaven, and those who believe in Jesus and pray will be condemned.

As I understand the teachings of Christ – It is by grace that we are pardoned of our sins. But it is only by our good works that we are given blessings of appreciation; or as Jesus said, “Treasures in heaven”. It is my honest impression that Evangelicals fully expect to receive whatever Treasures of heaven possible without seeking them or laying them up in store. Is my impression incorrect?

No. You are a victim of grace/works debate, in which evangelicals emphasize grace so strongly, and insist so intensely that works have no part in salvation (conversion), that you get the impression we find works to be of no regard.

We do teach and believe in discipleship, Christian maturity, "letting people see our good works and glorify our God in heaven," etc. And again, sure, those who are the most faithful will be given the greatest honors in heaven.

[Justice]

I would suggest you put the works before the conversion (i.e. the horse before the cart), and it MUST be vice versa. Your statement here is the crux of the debate. We may not be able to reconcile it.

If we can, we would do something that thousands have failed to do.

It's too bad the Book of Mormon cannot be used as evidence.

Mosiah 5:

13 For how knoweth a man the master whom he has not served, and who is a stranger unto him, and is far from the thoughts and intents of his heart?

You cannot know someone, or be converted to someone, if you have not walked his path and served him.

Conversion does not come from complete darkness. One is converted by degrees; line upon line. If one does not serve Christ, or do His good works from smaller to greater, conversion, or knowledge of your salvation, cannot come. It doesn't happen overnight from complete ignorance to complete knowledge.

Some work MUST take place before you are truly converted.

[Justice]

There is no doubt that the journey to conversion often involves testing the waters by "experimenting" with goodness (godliness). Whether that is prayer or serving meals in a homeless shelter...or even serving on a mission...these activities can all help us see God and gain that sustaining faith--the type that results in conversion.

And I would add that it cannot happen without the things you mention.

That is the way of it. That is why Jesus gave the beattitudes.

Christ yokes Himself with us to bring us to salvation.

We cannot do it [for ourselves] without Him.

He cannot do it [for us] without us.

Both parties in the yoke is necessary; required. Both are needed to pull the load.

This is why He gave us the analogy of a yoke. A yoke is attached to 2 oxen, or whatever is used to pull ONE load. If one or the other were going to pull the load then you would attach them directly to the load. A yoke is unstable without 2. 2 are required to pull it.

Saying "good works are not required" is like saying "I don't have to keep His commandments." It's a dangerous place to be.

Too many try to combine one's own works with Christ's. Both are for a different purpose. Our works do not apply toward answering the demands of justice for the sins we have committed. But, our works are required to show that we love Him, that we love our fellow man, and that we will do what is necessary to accept His grace when offered, and that we have truly repented of the sin we have committed.

Doing nothing does not allow you to accept His grace. Therefore, good works are required.

[prisonchaplain]

If we can, we would do something that thousands have failed to do.

It's too bad the Book of Mormon cannot be used as evidence.

Mosiah 5:

13 For how knoweth a man the master whom he has not served, and who is a stranger unto him, and is far from the thoughts and intents of his heart?

You cannot know someone, or be converted to someone, if you have not walked his path and served him.

Conversion does not come from complete darkness. One is converted by degrees; line upon line. If one does not serve Christ, or do His good works from smaller to greater, conversion, or knowledge of your salvation, cannot come. It doesn't happen overnight from complete ignorance to complete knowledge.

Some work MUST take place before you are truly converted.

I'll simply lay out my understanding of terms, based purely on evangelical teaching. Perhaps you can see where I am coming from better. My sense is that we have a difference that may be irreconciliable--and yet, not quite as big as we imagine.

Conversion--I sincerely confess my sins to Jesus and ask him to forgive me. He does. I'm saved. I'm heaven-bound.

Progressive sanctification--I grow in christlikeness. What you called "line upon line, precept upon precept." I learn to understand more, and behave more godly.

Enduring to the end--like LDS, my faith tradition believes it is possible to "lose salvation." We can so neglect that it becomes of no effect. We can consciously walk away from it. We can give ourselves over to error.

So, it seems the difference is that I will claim my conversion, my salvation, right away. Then I will work to please my Master to grow in it. I also work to protect it. You seem to suggest that your labor is to make sure you get it at the end.