Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

31
8/20/2019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/talking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1/31 TALKING DOCTRINE  MORMONS & EVANGELICALS IN CONVERSATION EDITED BY RICHARD J. MOUW & ROBERT L. MILLET 

Transcript of Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

Page 1: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 131

TALKINGDOCTRINE MORMONS amp EVANGELICALS

IN CONVERSATION

EDITED BY

RICHARD J MOUW

amp ROBERT L MILLET

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 231

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 331

TALKING

DOCTRINE MORMONS amp EVANGELICALS

IN CONV ERSATION

EDITED BY

RICHARD J MOUW amp ROBERT L MILLET

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 431

InterVarsity Press

PO Box 983089983092983088983088 Downers Grove IL 983094983088983093983089983093-983089983092983090983094

ivpresscom

emailivpresscom

copy983090983088983089983093 by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet

All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without written permission from

InterVarsity Press

InterVarsity Pressreg is the book-publishing division of InterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSAreg a movement of

students and faculty active on campus at hundreds of universities colleges and schools of nursing in the United

States of America and a member movement of the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students For

information about local and regional activities visit intervarsityorg

While any stories in this book are true some names and identifying information may have been changed to protect

the privacy of individuals

Cover design Cindy Kiple

Interior design Beth McGill

Images cross and steeple copy Strathdee Holdi LtdiStockphoto

golden angel and steeple copy meshaphotoiStockphoto

ISBN 983097983095983096-983088-983096983091983088983096-983092983088983096983088-983097 (print)

ISBN 983097983095983096-983088-983096983091983088983096-983097983096983096983090-983092 (digital)

Printed in the United States of America

As a member of the Green Press Initiative InterVarsity Press is committed to protectingthe environment and to the responsible use of natural resources o learn more visit

greenpressinitiativeorg

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

alking doctrine Mormons and Evangelicals in conversation edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet

pages cm

Includes bibliographical references

ISBN 983097983095983096-983088-983096983091983088983096-983092983088983096983088-983097 (pbk alk paper)

983089 EvangelicalismmdashRelationsmdashChurch of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 983090 EvangelicalismmdashRelationsmdash

Mormon Church 983091 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day SaintsmdashRelationsmdashEvangelicalism 983092 Mormon

Church--RelationsmdashEvangelicalism 983093 Evangelicalism 983094 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saintsmdash

Doctrines I Mouw Richard J editor II Millet Robert L editor

BR983089983094983092983089M983094983095983091983093 983090983088983089983093

983090983096983097983091rsquo983091983090--dc983090983091

983090983088983089983093983088983089983092983096983096983092

P 983090983091 983090983090 983090983089 983090983088 983089983097 983089983096 983089983095 983089983094 983089983093 983089983092 983089983091 983089983090 983089983089 983089983088 983097 983096 983095 983094 983093 983092 983091 983090 983089

Y 983091983093 983091983092 983091983091 983091983090 983091983089 983091983088 983090983097 983090983096 983090983095 983090983094 983090983093 983090983092 983090983091 983090983090 983090983089 983090983088 983089983097 983089983096 983089983095 983089983094 983089983093

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 531

C983151983150983156983141983150983156983155

Preaces by the Editors 983097

Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet

P983137983154983156 983089 T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141 983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

983089 he Dialogue Backgrounds and Context 983089983093

Derek J Bowen

983090 Relections Ater Fiteen Years 983090983089

Robert L Millet

983091 What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 983090983096

J Spencer Fluhman

983092 Looking Ahead My Dreams or

Mormon-Evangelical Dialogues 983091983091

Craig L Blomberg

983093 Responding to Millet and Fluhman 983091983096

James E Bradley

983094 A Serious Call to Devout and Holy Dialogue

Going Deeper in Interaith Discussions 983092983089

Gerald R McDermott

983095 Apologetics as i People Mattered 983093983089

Dennis Okholm

983096 From Calvary to Cumorah

he Signiicance o ldquoSacred Spacerdquo 983094983088

Richard E Bennett

983097 Mormon-Evangelical Dialogue

Embracing a Hermeneutic o Generosity 983095983089

Rachel Cope

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 631

983089983088 emple Garments A Case Study in the Lived

Religion o Mormons 983096983088

Cory B Willson

983089983089 Mormons and Evangelicals in the Public Square 983097983088

J B Haws

983089983090 An Evangelical at Brigham Young University 983089983088983088

Sarah aylor

P983137983154983156 983090 S983152983141983139983145983142983145983139 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983137983148 D983145983155983139983157983155983155983145983151983150983155

983089983091 How Many Gods Mormons and Evangelicals

Discussing the Debate 983089983089983089

Craig L Blomberg

983089983092 he rinity 983089983090983093

Christopher A Hall

983089983093 Divine Investiture Mormonism and

the Concept o rinity 983089983091983090

Brian D Birch

983089983094 Praxis A Lived rinitarianism 983089983092983090

Bill Heersink

983089983095 heological Anthropology

he Origin and Nature o Human Beings 983089983092983095

Grant Underwood

983089983096 ldquoHow Great a Debtorrdquo Mormon Relections on Grace 983089983094983089

Camille Fronk Olson

983089983097 Authority Is Everything 983089983095983088

Robert L Millet

983090983088 Revealed ruth alking About Our Dierences 983089983095983095

Richard J Mouw

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 731

983090983089 wo Questions and Four Laws Missiological Relections

on LDS and Evangelical Missions in Port Moresby 983089983096983097

C Douglas McConnell

983090983090 Becoming as God 983090983088983088

Robert L Millet

983090983091 Is Mormonism Biblical 983090983088983095

J B Haws

Aterword 983090983089983097

Robert L Millet

Notes 983090983090983090

Contributors 983090983093983091

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 831

P983154983141983142983137983139983141983155 983138983161 983156983144983141 E983140983145983156983151983154983155

R983145983139983144983137983154983140 J M983151983157983159

Since I am one o the essay-writers in this book it is probably quite immodest

to say so but I will say it anyway this is an amazing collection o essays Even

i the essays were poorly donemdashwhich is certainly not the casemdashthis would

be an amazing book Who would have thought fifeen years ago that the group

o Mormons and evangelicals who gathered or the first time on the Provo

campus o Brigham Young University would eventually produce the kinds

o essays gathered in this volume Te past encounters between our two

aith communities had been rom the beginnings o Mormonism in the

early decades o the nineteenth century typified by angry accusations and

denunciatory rhetoric And now in the ollowing pages we find thoughtul

respectul and nuanced engagements with each otherrsquos perspectives on some

o the most controversial topics that have inflamed our passions in the past

As Robert Millet reports in chapter two at that first Provo meeting we all

elt awkward and anxious sensing that we were stepping out on a path that

was pretty much uncharted o be sure we had a strong hint that something

good might come o our efforts Our joint decision to orm the dialogue

group had been influenced in good part by the appearance o a wonderul

volume How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conver-

sation published by InterVarsity Press in 1048625104863310486331048631 Indeed the coauthors o that

volume Stephen Robinson and Craig Blomberg were both present at our

first session on the Brigham Young campus We saw the two o them as

courageous pioneers who had been willing to take the risk o initiating a newkind o conversation and then o agreeing to go public with their provi-

sional assessments o the nature o the ldquodividerdquo And it also took some

courage or an evangelical press to publish what they were reporting But

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 931

10486251048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Stephen and Craig knew that they had only begun to scratch the surace and

that their explorations had to probe more deeply

For those o us who have contributed to this volume it is clear thatwe can look back to that first meeting in 1048626104862410486241048624 and saymdashto paraphrase

1048625 John 10486271048626 a text that loomed large in our later discussions o what it

means or humans to be ldquodivinizedrdquomdashthat it did not yet appear what

we could be in our commitment to becoming dialogue partners he

essays here show the great sensitivity and clarity we developed in our

eorts to build bridges across what in the past had looked like an un-

bridgeable divideWhile the essays in this book nicely document our efforts they also point

beyond themselves to more proound personal engagements that cannot be

captured in the written record For several o us representing evangelicalism

we will never orget our depth o eeling when we were gathered on the

eastern bank o the Mississippi River listening to a moving account by a

Latter-day Saints historian and colleague o what it was like or the Nauvoo

Mormons to flee rom that very spot westward afer the murder o Joseph

Smith in the nearby Carthage jail Or what is was like to grieve together over

the death rom cancer o one o our much-loved riends Brigham Young

Universityrsquos Paul Peterson whose lie we celebrated by singing together

ldquoHow Great Tou Artrdquo the one hymn that he had insisted be eatured at his

uneral Or what it meant to request each otherrsquos prayers in times o illness

or amily crisis

While those experiences have or many o us a significance or matters o

the heart this book o essays is an importantmdashyes an amazingmdashwritten

record o an intellectual journey taken together thus ar We publish these

essays at a time when we have paused to think about ways we might explore

new initiatives on several different ronts Where those initiatives might take

us in another fifeen years ldquodoth not yet appearrdquo But this volume serves as

an encouraging signpost on a path that we are firmly convinced is leading

us to more amazing engagements along the way

R983151983138983141983154983156 L M983145983148983148983141983156

For a very long timemdashlonger than should be the casemdashevangelical Chris-

tians and Latter-day Saints (Mormons) have ldquoenjoyedrdquo a relationship that

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1031

Prefaces by the Editors 10486251048625

could at best be described as guarded and suspicious and at worst as an-

tagonistic and hostile Evangelicals have seen their Mormon counterparts

as sheep stealers competitors or the souls o men and women enemies othe Christian aith Mormons have requently characterized evangelicals as

overly exclusionary arrogant and filled with rancor Consequently harsh

rhetoric and angry discourse have been the order o the day No matter what

ldquosiderdquo one may be on when observed rom a lofier perch such wranglings

surely must come across as anything but Christian an affront to the Saviorrsquos

plea in his great intercessory prayer that his ollowers those who proess

aith in his name all may be oneIn recent years however evangelicals and Mormons have requently

ound themselves laboring as cobelligerents against influences in our

world that threaten to tear at the very abric o our societymdashmilitant

atheism growing secularism ethical relativism and rontal attacks on

marriage the amily and religious liberty No doubt some measure o ner-

vousness has existed on the part o participants in these battles but at least

many socially active men and women on both ronts have had to ac-

knowledge that members o evangelical Christian churches and members

o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints share a common moral

code and both yearn or a better world or their children and grand-

children than now exists

In addition on a small scale to be sure there has been an effort underway

since 1048626104862410486241048624 at least among a handul belonging to both aith traditions to

better understand and appreciate one another an effort to speak cordially

to listen attentively and to discuss o all things theological matters even

theological differences Neither group came to the enterprise with an eccle-

siastical imprimatur in hand and neither group ever purported to represent

anything other than their own private views o what they believed In the

spring o 1048626104862410486241048624 at the top o the N Eldon anner Building at Brigham Young

University in Provo Utah a gathering o very anxious and uncertain reli-

gious scholars took place an endeavor that would affect the participants in

ways they never would have supposed It would result in riendships that

would prove to be long-lasting travel to various sites o ldquosacred spacerdquo or

each group and or some a new way o viewing onersquos ellow men and women

and the overall plans and purposes o Almighty God Tis book is the story

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1131

10486251048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

o that singular endeavor It is a report o the Mormon-evangelical dialogue

rom 1048626104862410486241048624ndash1048626104862410486251048628 a careul consideration o what took place at several o the

doctrinal discussions and what was decidedmdashdefinite and seemingly irrec-oncilable differences matters deserving o continued exploration and areas

o surprising similarity

In speaking o the ormative days o Mormonism one Latter-day Saint

leader Oliver Cowdery commented that ldquothese were days never to be or-

gottenrdquo And so it was with us Te Mormon-evangelical dialogue was a

distinctive and memorable experience one that has changed us or the

better Our sincere hope is that the reader will find the report o theseldquovexations o the soulrdquo to be not only intellectually stimulating and even

entertaining reading but also motivational in the sense o prompting

readers to reach out to those who are different to strike up a conversation

to listen with empathy and to be willing to learn and to be affected Richard

Mouw suggested in his important work Uncommon Decency that interaith

dialogue is always helped along by a healthy dose o curiosity and so we

extend the challenge to those who may read this book even i only in the

name o sheer curiosity to ldquogo and do thou likewiserdquo Te results just might

surprise you

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1231

983152983137983154983156 983151983150983141

T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1331

852017

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Backgrounds and Context

Derek J Bowen

E983158983137983150983143983141983148983145983139983137983148983155 983137983150983140 M983151983154983149983151983150983155 are relative newcomers to the

practice o interaith dialogue Te genesis o modern interaith dialogue is

generally traced back to the 104862585202410486331048627 Worldrsquos Parliament o Religions held in

conjunction with the Chicago Worldrsquos Fair1

Although Christianity largelydominated the conerence nine other religions were represented Mormons

and many evangelicals were among those groups missing and it wasnrsquot by

accident For Mormons their ldquorepresentation was not wanted nor solicited

by the organizers o the 104862585202410486331048627 Parliamentrdquo2 Even afer inclusion was reluc-

tantly granted urther discrimination caused the Mormon delegation to

walk out in protest As or evangelicals the identification o interaith dia-

logue with liberal Protestantism was enough to keep conservatives like

Dwight L Moody and the archbishop o Canterbury away rom the event

believing the parliament symbolized the compromise o Christianity3 Con-

sequently Mormons and evangelicals did not participate in the beginnings

and early practice o interaith dialoguemdashdue to the discriminatory ex-

clusion o Mormons as opposed to the deliberate avoidance o evangelicals

Despite their differing reasons or absence both groups have generally con-

tinued to remain aloo rom this movement or most o its existence Yet

ironically two o the groups most averse to interaith dialogue decades ago

now have among their ranks some o the greatest beneficiaries and practi-

tioners o the enterprise in the present-day Mormon-evangelical scholarly

dialogue It is equally surprising that the dialogue is specifically occurring

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 2: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 231

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 331

TALKING

DOCTRINE MORMONS amp EVANGELICALS

IN CONV ERSATION

EDITED BY

RICHARD J MOUW amp ROBERT L MILLET

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 431

InterVarsity Press

PO Box 983089983092983088983088 Downers Grove IL 983094983088983093983089983093-983089983092983090983094

ivpresscom

emailivpresscom

copy983090983088983089983093 by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet

All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without written permission from

InterVarsity Press

InterVarsity Pressreg is the book-publishing division of InterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSAreg a movement of

students and faculty active on campus at hundreds of universities colleges and schools of nursing in the United

States of America and a member movement of the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students For

information about local and regional activities visit intervarsityorg

While any stories in this book are true some names and identifying information may have been changed to protect

the privacy of individuals

Cover design Cindy Kiple

Interior design Beth McGill

Images cross and steeple copy Strathdee Holdi LtdiStockphoto

golden angel and steeple copy meshaphotoiStockphoto

ISBN 983097983095983096-983088-983096983091983088983096-983092983088983096983088-983097 (print)

ISBN 983097983095983096-983088-983096983091983088983096-983097983096983096983090-983092 (digital)

Printed in the United States of America

As a member of the Green Press Initiative InterVarsity Press is committed to protectingthe environment and to the responsible use of natural resources o learn more visit

greenpressinitiativeorg

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

alking doctrine Mormons and Evangelicals in conversation edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet

pages cm

Includes bibliographical references

ISBN 983097983095983096-983088-983096983091983088983096-983092983088983096983088-983097 (pbk alk paper)

983089 EvangelicalismmdashRelationsmdashChurch of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 983090 EvangelicalismmdashRelationsmdash

Mormon Church 983091 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day SaintsmdashRelationsmdashEvangelicalism 983092 Mormon

Church--RelationsmdashEvangelicalism 983093 Evangelicalism 983094 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saintsmdash

Doctrines I Mouw Richard J editor II Millet Robert L editor

BR983089983094983092983089M983094983095983091983093 983090983088983089983093

983090983096983097983091rsquo983091983090--dc983090983091

983090983088983089983093983088983089983092983096983096983092

P 983090983091 983090983090 983090983089 983090983088 983089983097 983089983096 983089983095 983089983094 983089983093 983089983092 983089983091 983089983090 983089983089 983089983088 983097 983096 983095 983094 983093 983092 983091 983090 983089

Y 983091983093 983091983092 983091983091 983091983090 983091983089 983091983088 983090983097 983090983096 983090983095 983090983094 983090983093 983090983092 983090983091 983090983090 983090983089 983090983088 983089983097 983089983096 983089983095 983089983094 983089983093

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 531

C983151983150983156983141983150983156983155

Preaces by the Editors 983097

Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet

P983137983154983156 983089 T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141 983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

983089 he Dialogue Backgrounds and Context 983089983093

Derek J Bowen

983090 Relections Ater Fiteen Years 983090983089

Robert L Millet

983091 What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 983090983096

J Spencer Fluhman

983092 Looking Ahead My Dreams or

Mormon-Evangelical Dialogues 983091983091

Craig L Blomberg

983093 Responding to Millet and Fluhman 983091983096

James E Bradley

983094 A Serious Call to Devout and Holy Dialogue

Going Deeper in Interaith Discussions 983092983089

Gerald R McDermott

983095 Apologetics as i People Mattered 983093983089

Dennis Okholm

983096 From Calvary to Cumorah

he Signiicance o ldquoSacred Spacerdquo 983094983088

Richard E Bennett

983097 Mormon-Evangelical Dialogue

Embracing a Hermeneutic o Generosity 983095983089

Rachel Cope

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 631

983089983088 emple Garments A Case Study in the Lived

Religion o Mormons 983096983088

Cory B Willson

983089983089 Mormons and Evangelicals in the Public Square 983097983088

J B Haws

983089983090 An Evangelical at Brigham Young University 983089983088983088

Sarah aylor

P983137983154983156 983090 S983152983141983139983145983142983145983139 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983137983148 D983145983155983139983157983155983155983145983151983150983155

983089983091 How Many Gods Mormons and Evangelicals

Discussing the Debate 983089983089983089

Craig L Blomberg

983089983092 he rinity 983089983090983093

Christopher A Hall

983089983093 Divine Investiture Mormonism and

the Concept o rinity 983089983091983090

Brian D Birch

983089983094 Praxis A Lived rinitarianism 983089983092983090

Bill Heersink

983089983095 heological Anthropology

he Origin and Nature o Human Beings 983089983092983095

Grant Underwood

983089983096 ldquoHow Great a Debtorrdquo Mormon Relections on Grace 983089983094983089

Camille Fronk Olson

983089983097 Authority Is Everything 983089983095983088

Robert L Millet

983090983088 Revealed ruth alking About Our Dierences 983089983095983095

Richard J Mouw

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 731

983090983089 wo Questions and Four Laws Missiological Relections

on LDS and Evangelical Missions in Port Moresby 983089983096983097

C Douglas McConnell

983090983090 Becoming as God 983090983088983088

Robert L Millet

983090983091 Is Mormonism Biblical 983090983088983095

J B Haws

Aterword 983090983089983097

Robert L Millet

Notes 983090983090983090

Contributors 983090983093983091

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 831

P983154983141983142983137983139983141983155 983138983161 983156983144983141 E983140983145983156983151983154983155

R983145983139983144983137983154983140 J M983151983157983159

Since I am one o the essay-writers in this book it is probably quite immodest

to say so but I will say it anyway this is an amazing collection o essays Even

i the essays were poorly donemdashwhich is certainly not the casemdashthis would

be an amazing book Who would have thought fifeen years ago that the group

o Mormons and evangelicals who gathered or the first time on the Provo

campus o Brigham Young University would eventually produce the kinds

o essays gathered in this volume Te past encounters between our two

aith communities had been rom the beginnings o Mormonism in the

early decades o the nineteenth century typified by angry accusations and

denunciatory rhetoric And now in the ollowing pages we find thoughtul

respectul and nuanced engagements with each otherrsquos perspectives on some

o the most controversial topics that have inflamed our passions in the past

As Robert Millet reports in chapter two at that first Provo meeting we all

elt awkward and anxious sensing that we were stepping out on a path that

was pretty much uncharted o be sure we had a strong hint that something

good might come o our efforts Our joint decision to orm the dialogue

group had been influenced in good part by the appearance o a wonderul

volume How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conver-

sation published by InterVarsity Press in 1048625104863310486331048631 Indeed the coauthors o that

volume Stephen Robinson and Craig Blomberg were both present at our

first session on the Brigham Young campus We saw the two o them as

courageous pioneers who had been willing to take the risk o initiating a newkind o conversation and then o agreeing to go public with their provi-

sional assessments o the nature o the ldquodividerdquo And it also took some

courage or an evangelical press to publish what they were reporting But

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 931

10486251048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Stephen and Craig knew that they had only begun to scratch the surace and

that their explorations had to probe more deeply

For those o us who have contributed to this volume it is clear thatwe can look back to that first meeting in 1048626104862410486241048624 and saymdashto paraphrase

1048625 John 10486271048626 a text that loomed large in our later discussions o what it

means or humans to be ldquodivinizedrdquomdashthat it did not yet appear what

we could be in our commitment to becoming dialogue partners he

essays here show the great sensitivity and clarity we developed in our

eorts to build bridges across what in the past had looked like an un-

bridgeable divideWhile the essays in this book nicely document our efforts they also point

beyond themselves to more proound personal engagements that cannot be

captured in the written record For several o us representing evangelicalism

we will never orget our depth o eeling when we were gathered on the

eastern bank o the Mississippi River listening to a moving account by a

Latter-day Saints historian and colleague o what it was like or the Nauvoo

Mormons to flee rom that very spot westward afer the murder o Joseph

Smith in the nearby Carthage jail Or what is was like to grieve together over

the death rom cancer o one o our much-loved riends Brigham Young

Universityrsquos Paul Peterson whose lie we celebrated by singing together

ldquoHow Great Tou Artrdquo the one hymn that he had insisted be eatured at his

uneral Or what it meant to request each otherrsquos prayers in times o illness

or amily crisis

While those experiences have or many o us a significance or matters o

the heart this book o essays is an importantmdashyes an amazingmdashwritten

record o an intellectual journey taken together thus ar We publish these

essays at a time when we have paused to think about ways we might explore

new initiatives on several different ronts Where those initiatives might take

us in another fifeen years ldquodoth not yet appearrdquo But this volume serves as

an encouraging signpost on a path that we are firmly convinced is leading

us to more amazing engagements along the way

R983151983138983141983154983156 L M983145983148983148983141983156

For a very long timemdashlonger than should be the casemdashevangelical Chris-

tians and Latter-day Saints (Mormons) have ldquoenjoyedrdquo a relationship that

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1031

Prefaces by the Editors 10486251048625

could at best be described as guarded and suspicious and at worst as an-

tagonistic and hostile Evangelicals have seen their Mormon counterparts

as sheep stealers competitors or the souls o men and women enemies othe Christian aith Mormons have requently characterized evangelicals as

overly exclusionary arrogant and filled with rancor Consequently harsh

rhetoric and angry discourse have been the order o the day No matter what

ldquosiderdquo one may be on when observed rom a lofier perch such wranglings

surely must come across as anything but Christian an affront to the Saviorrsquos

plea in his great intercessory prayer that his ollowers those who proess

aith in his name all may be oneIn recent years however evangelicals and Mormons have requently

ound themselves laboring as cobelligerents against influences in our

world that threaten to tear at the very abric o our societymdashmilitant

atheism growing secularism ethical relativism and rontal attacks on

marriage the amily and religious liberty No doubt some measure o ner-

vousness has existed on the part o participants in these battles but at least

many socially active men and women on both ronts have had to ac-

knowledge that members o evangelical Christian churches and members

o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints share a common moral

code and both yearn or a better world or their children and grand-

children than now exists

In addition on a small scale to be sure there has been an effort underway

since 1048626104862410486241048624 at least among a handul belonging to both aith traditions to

better understand and appreciate one another an effort to speak cordially

to listen attentively and to discuss o all things theological matters even

theological differences Neither group came to the enterprise with an eccle-

siastical imprimatur in hand and neither group ever purported to represent

anything other than their own private views o what they believed In the

spring o 1048626104862410486241048624 at the top o the N Eldon anner Building at Brigham Young

University in Provo Utah a gathering o very anxious and uncertain reli-

gious scholars took place an endeavor that would affect the participants in

ways they never would have supposed It would result in riendships that

would prove to be long-lasting travel to various sites o ldquosacred spacerdquo or

each group and or some a new way o viewing onersquos ellow men and women

and the overall plans and purposes o Almighty God Tis book is the story

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1131

10486251048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

o that singular endeavor It is a report o the Mormon-evangelical dialogue

rom 1048626104862410486241048624ndash1048626104862410486251048628 a careul consideration o what took place at several o the

doctrinal discussions and what was decidedmdashdefinite and seemingly irrec-oncilable differences matters deserving o continued exploration and areas

o surprising similarity

In speaking o the ormative days o Mormonism one Latter-day Saint

leader Oliver Cowdery commented that ldquothese were days never to be or-

gottenrdquo And so it was with us Te Mormon-evangelical dialogue was a

distinctive and memorable experience one that has changed us or the

better Our sincere hope is that the reader will find the report o theseldquovexations o the soulrdquo to be not only intellectually stimulating and even

entertaining reading but also motivational in the sense o prompting

readers to reach out to those who are different to strike up a conversation

to listen with empathy and to be willing to learn and to be affected Richard

Mouw suggested in his important work Uncommon Decency that interaith

dialogue is always helped along by a healthy dose o curiosity and so we

extend the challenge to those who may read this book even i only in the

name o sheer curiosity to ldquogo and do thou likewiserdquo Te results just might

surprise you

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1231

983152983137983154983156 983151983150983141

T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1331

852017

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Backgrounds and Context

Derek J Bowen

E983158983137983150983143983141983148983145983139983137983148983155 983137983150983140 M983151983154983149983151983150983155 are relative newcomers to the

practice o interaith dialogue Te genesis o modern interaith dialogue is

generally traced back to the 104862585202410486331048627 Worldrsquos Parliament o Religions held in

conjunction with the Chicago Worldrsquos Fair1

Although Christianity largelydominated the conerence nine other religions were represented Mormons

and many evangelicals were among those groups missing and it wasnrsquot by

accident For Mormons their ldquorepresentation was not wanted nor solicited

by the organizers o the 104862585202410486331048627 Parliamentrdquo2 Even afer inclusion was reluc-

tantly granted urther discrimination caused the Mormon delegation to

walk out in protest As or evangelicals the identification o interaith dia-

logue with liberal Protestantism was enough to keep conservatives like

Dwight L Moody and the archbishop o Canterbury away rom the event

believing the parliament symbolized the compromise o Christianity3 Con-

sequently Mormons and evangelicals did not participate in the beginnings

and early practice o interaith dialoguemdashdue to the discriminatory ex-

clusion o Mormons as opposed to the deliberate avoidance o evangelicals

Despite their differing reasons or absence both groups have generally con-

tinued to remain aloo rom this movement or most o its existence Yet

ironically two o the groups most averse to interaith dialogue decades ago

now have among their ranks some o the greatest beneficiaries and practi-

tioners o the enterprise in the present-day Mormon-evangelical scholarly

dialogue It is equally surprising that the dialogue is specifically occurring

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 3: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 331

TALKING

DOCTRINE MORMONS amp EVANGELICALS

IN CONV ERSATION

EDITED BY

RICHARD J MOUW amp ROBERT L MILLET

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 431

InterVarsity Press

PO Box 983089983092983088983088 Downers Grove IL 983094983088983093983089983093-983089983092983090983094

ivpresscom

emailivpresscom

copy983090983088983089983093 by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet

All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without written permission from

InterVarsity Press

InterVarsity Pressreg is the book-publishing division of InterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSAreg a movement of

students and faculty active on campus at hundreds of universities colleges and schools of nursing in the United

States of America and a member movement of the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students For

information about local and regional activities visit intervarsityorg

While any stories in this book are true some names and identifying information may have been changed to protect

the privacy of individuals

Cover design Cindy Kiple

Interior design Beth McGill

Images cross and steeple copy Strathdee Holdi LtdiStockphoto

golden angel and steeple copy meshaphotoiStockphoto

ISBN 983097983095983096-983088-983096983091983088983096-983092983088983096983088-983097 (print)

ISBN 983097983095983096-983088-983096983091983088983096-983097983096983096983090-983092 (digital)

Printed in the United States of America

As a member of the Green Press Initiative InterVarsity Press is committed to protectingthe environment and to the responsible use of natural resources o learn more visit

greenpressinitiativeorg

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

alking doctrine Mormons and Evangelicals in conversation edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet

pages cm

Includes bibliographical references

ISBN 983097983095983096-983088-983096983091983088983096-983092983088983096983088-983097 (pbk alk paper)

983089 EvangelicalismmdashRelationsmdashChurch of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 983090 EvangelicalismmdashRelationsmdash

Mormon Church 983091 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day SaintsmdashRelationsmdashEvangelicalism 983092 Mormon

Church--RelationsmdashEvangelicalism 983093 Evangelicalism 983094 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saintsmdash

Doctrines I Mouw Richard J editor II Millet Robert L editor

BR983089983094983092983089M983094983095983091983093 983090983088983089983093

983090983096983097983091rsquo983091983090--dc983090983091

983090983088983089983093983088983089983092983096983096983092

P 983090983091 983090983090 983090983089 983090983088 983089983097 983089983096 983089983095 983089983094 983089983093 983089983092 983089983091 983089983090 983089983089 983089983088 983097 983096 983095 983094 983093 983092 983091 983090 983089

Y 983091983093 983091983092 983091983091 983091983090 983091983089 983091983088 983090983097 983090983096 983090983095 983090983094 983090983093 983090983092 983090983091 983090983090 983090983089 983090983088 983089983097 983089983096 983089983095 983089983094 983089983093

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 531

C983151983150983156983141983150983156983155

Preaces by the Editors 983097

Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet

P983137983154983156 983089 T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141 983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

983089 he Dialogue Backgrounds and Context 983089983093

Derek J Bowen

983090 Relections Ater Fiteen Years 983090983089

Robert L Millet

983091 What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 983090983096

J Spencer Fluhman

983092 Looking Ahead My Dreams or

Mormon-Evangelical Dialogues 983091983091

Craig L Blomberg

983093 Responding to Millet and Fluhman 983091983096

James E Bradley

983094 A Serious Call to Devout and Holy Dialogue

Going Deeper in Interaith Discussions 983092983089

Gerald R McDermott

983095 Apologetics as i People Mattered 983093983089

Dennis Okholm

983096 From Calvary to Cumorah

he Signiicance o ldquoSacred Spacerdquo 983094983088

Richard E Bennett

983097 Mormon-Evangelical Dialogue

Embracing a Hermeneutic o Generosity 983095983089

Rachel Cope

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 631

983089983088 emple Garments A Case Study in the Lived

Religion o Mormons 983096983088

Cory B Willson

983089983089 Mormons and Evangelicals in the Public Square 983097983088

J B Haws

983089983090 An Evangelical at Brigham Young University 983089983088983088

Sarah aylor

P983137983154983156 983090 S983152983141983139983145983142983145983139 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983137983148 D983145983155983139983157983155983155983145983151983150983155

983089983091 How Many Gods Mormons and Evangelicals

Discussing the Debate 983089983089983089

Craig L Blomberg

983089983092 he rinity 983089983090983093

Christopher A Hall

983089983093 Divine Investiture Mormonism and

the Concept o rinity 983089983091983090

Brian D Birch

983089983094 Praxis A Lived rinitarianism 983089983092983090

Bill Heersink

983089983095 heological Anthropology

he Origin and Nature o Human Beings 983089983092983095

Grant Underwood

983089983096 ldquoHow Great a Debtorrdquo Mormon Relections on Grace 983089983094983089

Camille Fronk Olson

983089983097 Authority Is Everything 983089983095983088

Robert L Millet

983090983088 Revealed ruth alking About Our Dierences 983089983095983095

Richard J Mouw

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 731

983090983089 wo Questions and Four Laws Missiological Relections

on LDS and Evangelical Missions in Port Moresby 983089983096983097

C Douglas McConnell

983090983090 Becoming as God 983090983088983088

Robert L Millet

983090983091 Is Mormonism Biblical 983090983088983095

J B Haws

Aterword 983090983089983097

Robert L Millet

Notes 983090983090983090

Contributors 983090983093983091

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 831

P983154983141983142983137983139983141983155 983138983161 983156983144983141 E983140983145983156983151983154983155

R983145983139983144983137983154983140 J M983151983157983159

Since I am one o the essay-writers in this book it is probably quite immodest

to say so but I will say it anyway this is an amazing collection o essays Even

i the essays were poorly donemdashwhich is certainly not the casemdashthis would

be an amazing book Who would have thought fifeen years ago that the group

o Mormons and evangelicals who gathered or the first time on the Provo

campus o Brigham Young University would eventually produce the kinds

o essays gathered in this volume Te past encounters between our two

aith communities had been rom the beginnings o Mormonism in the

early decades o the nineteenth century typified by angry accusations and

denunciatory rhetoric And now in the ollowing pages we find thoughtul

respectul and nuanced engagements with each otherrsquos perspectives on some

o the most controversial topics that have inflamed our passions in the past

As Robert Millet reports in chapter two at that first Provo meeting we all

elt awkward and anxious sensing that we were stepping out on a path that

was pretty much uncharted o be sure we had a strong hint that something

good might come o our efforts Our joint decision to orm the dialogue

group had been influenced in good part by the appearance o a wonderul

volume How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conver-

sation published by InterVarsity Press in 1048625104863310486331048631 Indeed the coauthors o that

volume Stephen Robinson and Craig Blomberg were both present at our

first session on the Brigham Young campus We saw the two o them as

courageous pioneers who had been willing to take the risk o initiating a newkind o conversation and then o agreeing to go public with their provi-

sional assessments o the nature o the ldquodividerdquo And it also took some

courage or an evangelical press to publish what they were reporting But

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 931

10486251048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Stephen and Craig knew that they had only begun to scratch the surace and

that their explorations had to probe more deeply

For those o us who have contributed to this volume it is clear thatwe can look back to that first meeting in 1048626104862410486241048624 and saymdashto paraphrase

1048625 John 10486271048626 a text that loomed large in our later discussions o what it

means or humans to be ldquodivinizedrdquomdashthat it did not yet appear what

we could be in our commitment to becoming dialogue partners he

essays here show the great sensitivity and clarity we developed in our

eorts to build bridges across what in the past had looked like an un-

bridgeable divideWhile the essays in this book nicely document our efforts they also point

beyond themselves to more proound personal engagements that cannot be

captured in the written record For several o us representing evangelicalism

we will never orget our depth o eeling when we were gathered on the

eastern bank o the Mississippi River listening to a moving account by a

Latter-day Saints historian and colleague o what it was like or the Nauvoo

Mormons to flee rom that very spot westward afer the murder o Joseph

Smith in the nearby Carthage jail Or what is was like to grieve together over

the death rom cancer o one o our much-loved riends Brigham Young

Universityrsquos Paul Peterson whose lie we celebrated by singing together

ldquoHow Great Tou Artrdquo the one hymn that he had insisted be eatured at his

uneral Or what it meant to request each otherrsquos prayers in times o illness

or amily crisis

While those experiences have or many o us a significance or matters o

the heart this book o essays is an importantmdashyes an amazingmdashwritten

record o an intellectual journey taken together thus ar We publish these

essays at a time when we have paused to think about ways we might explore

new initiatives on several different ronts Where those initiatives might take

us in another fifeen years ldquodoth not yet appearrdquo But this volume serves as

an encouraging signpost on a path that we are firmly convinced is leading

us to more amazing engagements along the way

R983151983138983141983154983156 L M983145983148983148983141983156

For a very long timemdashlonger than should be the casemdashevangelical Chris-

tians and Latter-day Saints (Mormons) have ldquoenjoyedrdquo a relationship that

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1031

Prefaces by the Editors 10486251048625

could at best be described as guarded and suspicious and at worst as an-

tagonistic and hostile Evangelicals have seen their Mormon counterparts

as sheep stealers competitors or the souls o men and women enemies othe Christian aith Mormons have requently characterized evangelicals as

overly exclusionary arrogant and filled with rancor Consequently harsh

rhetoric and angry discourse have been the order o the day No matter what

ldquosiderdquo one may be on when observed rom a lofier perch such wranglings

surely must come across as anything but Christian an affront to the Saviorrsquos

plea in his great intercessory prayer that his ollowers those who proess

aith in his name all may be oneIn recent years however evangelicals and Mormons have requently

ound themselves laboring as cobelligerents against influences in our

world that threaten to tear at the very abric o our societymdashmilitant

atheism growing secularism ethical relativism and rontal attacks on

marriage the amily and religious liberty No doubt some measure o ner-

vousness has existed on the part o participants in these battles but at least

many socially active men and women on both ronts have had to ac-

knowledge that members o evangelical Christian churches and members

o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints share a common moral

code and both yearn or a better world or their children and grand-

children than now exists

In addition on a small scale to be sure there has been an effort underway

since 1048626104862410486241048624 at least among a handul belonging to both aith traditions to

better understand and appreciate one another an effort to speak cordially

to listen attentively and to discuss o all things theological matters even

theological differences Neither group came to the enterprise with an eccle-

siastical imprimatur in hand and neither group ever purported to represent

anything other than their own private views o what they believed In the

spring o 1048626104862410486241048624 at the top o the N Eldon anner Building at Brigham Young

University in Provo Utah a gathering o very anxious and uncertain reli-

gious scholars took place an endeavor that would affect the participants in

ways they never would have supposed It would result in riendships that

would prove to be long-lasting travel to various sites o ldquosacred spacerdquo or

each group and or some a new way o viewing onersquos ellow men and women

and the overall plans and purposes o Almighty God Tis book is the story

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1131

10486251048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

o that singular endeavor It is a report o the Mormon-evangelical dialogue

rom 1048626104862410486241048624ndash1048626104862410486251048628 a careul consideration o what took place at several o the

doctrinal discussions and what was decidedmdashdefinite and seemingly irrec-oncilable differences matters deserving o continued exploration and areas

o surprising similarity

In speaking o the ormative days o Mormonism one Latter-day Saint

leader Oliver Cowdery commented that ldquothese were days never to be or-

gottenrdquo And so it was with us Te Mormon-evangelical dialogue was a

distinctive and memorable experience one that has changed us or the

better Our sincere hope is that the reader will find the report o theseldquovexations o the soulrdquo to be not only intellectually stimulating and even

entertaining reading but also motivational in the sense o prompting

readers to reach out to those who are different to strike up a conversation

to listen with empathy and to be willing to learn and to be affected Richard

Mouw suggested in his important work Uncommon Decency that interaith

dialogue is always helped along by a healthy dose o curiosity and so we

extend the challenge to those who may read this book even i only in the

name o sheer curiosity to ldquogo and do thou likewiserdquo Te results just might

surprise you

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1231

983152983137983154983156 983151983150983141

T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1331

852017

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Backgrounds and Context

Derek J Bowen

E983158983137983150983143983141983148983145983139983137983148983155 983137983150983140 M983151983154983149983151983150983155 are relative newcomers to the

practice o interaith dialogue Te genesis o modern interaith dialogue is

generally traced back to the 104862585202410486331048627 Worldrsquos Parliament o Religions held in

conjunction with the Chicago Worldrsquos Fair1

Although Christianity largelydominated the conerence nine other religions were represented Mormons

and many evangelicals were among those groups missing and it wasnrsquot by

accident For Mormons their ldquorepresentation was not wanted nor solicited

by the organizers o the 104862585202410486331048627 Parliamentrdquo2 Even afer inclusion was reluc-

tantly granted urther discrimination caused the Mormon delegation to

walk out in protest As or evangelicals the identification o interaith dia-

logue with liberal Protestantism was enough to keep conservatives like

Dwight L Moody and the archbishop o Canterbury away rom the event

believing the parliament symbolized the compromise o Christianity3 Con-

sequently Mormons and evangelicals did not participate in the beginnings

and early practice o interaith dialoguemdashdue to the discriminatory ex-

clusion o Mormons as opposed to the deliberate avoidance o evangelicals

Despite their differing reasons or absence both groups have generally con-

tinued to remain aloo rom this movement or most o its existence Yet

ironically two o the groups most averse to interaith dialogue decades ago

now have among their ranks some o the greatest beneficiaries and practi-

tioners o the enterprise in the present-day Mormon-evangelical scholarly

dialogue It is equally surprising that the dialogue is specifically occurring

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 4: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 431

InterVarsity Press

PO Box 983089983092983088983088 Downers Grove IL 983094983088983093983089983093-983089983092983090983094

ivpresscom

emailivpresscom

copy983090983088983089983093 by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet

All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without written permission from

InterVarsity Press

InterVarsity Pressreg is the book-publishing division of InterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSAreg a movement of

students and faculty active on campus at hundreds of universities colleges and schools of nursing in the United

States of America and a member movement of the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students For

information about local and regional activities visit intervarsityorg

While any stories in this book are true some names and identifying information may have been changed to protect

the privacy of individuals

Cover design Cindy Kiple

Interior design Beth McGill

Images cross and steeple copy Strathdee Holdi LtdiStockphoto

golden angel and steeple copy meshaphotoiStockphoto

ISBN 983097983095983096-983088-983096983091983088983096-983092983088983096983088-983097 (print)

ISBN 983097983095983096-983088-983096983091983088983096-983097983096983096983090-983092 (digital)

Printed in the United States of America

As a member of the Green Press Initiative InterVarsity Press is committed to protectingthe environment and to the responsible use of natural resources o learn more visit

greenpressinitiativeorg

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

alking doctrine Mormons and Evangelicals in conversation edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet

pages cm

Includes bibliographical references

ISBN 983097983095983096-983088-983096983091983088983096-983092983088983096983088-983097 (pbk alk paper)

983089 EvangelicalismmdashRelationsmdashChurch of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 983090 EvangelicalismmdashRelationsmdash

Mormon Church 983091 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day SaintsmdashRelationsmdashEvangelicalism 983092 Mormon

Church--RelationsmdashEvangelicalism 983093 Evangelicalism 983094 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saintsmdash

Doctrines I Mouw Richard J editor II Millet Robert L editor

BR983089983094983092983089M983094983095983091983093 983090983088983089983093

983090983096983097983091rsquo983091983090--dc983090983091

983090983088983089983093983088983089983092983096983096983092

P 983090983091 983090983090 983090983089 983090983088 983089983097 983089983096 983089983095 983089983094 983089983093 983089983092 983089983091 983089983090 983089983089 983089983088 983097 983096 983095 983094 983093 983092 983091 983090 983089

Y 983091983093 983091983092 983091983091 983091983090 983091983089 983091983088 983090983097 983090983096 983090983095 983090983094 983090983093 983090983092 983090983091 983090983090 983090983089 983090983088 983089983097 983089983096 983089983095 983089983094 983089983093

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 531

C983151983150983156983141983150983156983155

Preaces by the Editors 983097

Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet

P983137983154983156 983089 T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141 983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

983089 he Dialogue Backgrounds and Context 983089983093

Derek J Bowen

983090 Relections Ater Fiteen Years 983090983089

Robert L Millet

983091 What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 983090983096

J Spencer Fluhman

983092 Looking Ahead My Dreams or

Mormon-Evangelical Dialogues 983091983091

Craig L Blomberg

983093 Responding to Millet and Fluhman 983091983096

James E Bradley

983094 A Serious Call to Devout and Holy Dialogue

Going Deeper in Interaith Discussions 983092983089

Gerald R McDermott

983095 Apologetics as i People Mattered 983093983089

Dennis Okholm

983096 From Calvary to Cumorah

he Signiicance o ldquoSacred Spacerdquo 983094983088

Richard E Bennett

983097 Mormon-Evangelical Dialogue

Embracing a Hermeneutic o Generosity 983095983089

Rachel Cope

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 631

983089983088 emple Garments A Case Study in the Lived

Religion o Mormons 983096983088

Cory B Willson

983089983089 Mormons and Evangelicals in the Public Square 983097983088

J B Haws

983089983090 An Evangelical at Brigham Young University 983089983088983088

Sarah aylor

P983137983154983156 983090 S983152983141983139983145983142983145983139 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983137983148 D983145983155983139983157983155983155983145983151983150983155

983089983091 How Many Gods Mormons and Evangelicals

Discussing the Debate 983089983089983089

Craig L Blomberg

983089983092 he rinity 983089983090983093

Christopher A Hall

983089983093 Divine Investiture Mormonism and

the Concept o rinity 983089983091983090

Brian D Birch

983089983094 Praxis A Lived rinitarianism 983089983092983090

Bill Heersink

983089983095 heological Anthropology

he Origin and Nature o Human Beings 983089983092983095

Grant Underwood

983089983096 ldquoHow Great a Debtorrdquo Mormon Relections on Grace 983089983094983089

Camille Fronk Olson

983089983097 Authority Is Everything 983089983095983088

Robert L Millet

983090983088 Revealed ruth alking About Our Dierences 983089983095983095

Richard J Mouw

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 731

983090983089 wo Questions and Four Laws Missiological Relections

on LDS and Evangelical Missions in Port Moresby 983089983096983097

C Douglas McConnell

983090983090 Becoming as God 983090983088983088

Robert L Millet

983090983091 Is Mormonism Biblical 983090983088983095

J B Haws

Aterword 983090983089983097

Robert L Millet

Notes 983090983090983090

Contributors 983090983093983091

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 831

P983154983141983142983137983139983141983155 983138983161 983156983144983141 E983140983145983156983151983154983155

R983145983139983144983137983154983140 J M983151983157983159

Since I am one o the essay-writers in this book it is probably quite immodest

to say so but I will say it anyway this is an amazing collection o essays Even

i the essays were poorly donemdashwhich is certainly not the casemdashthis would

be an amazing book Who would have thought fifeen years ago that the group

o Mormons and evangelicals who gathered or the first time on the Provo

campus o Brigham Young University would eventually produce the kinds

o essays gathered in this volume Te past encounters between our two

aith communities had been rom the beginnings o Mormonism in the

early decades o the nineteenth century typified by angry accusations and

denunciatory rhetoric And now in the ollowing pages we find thoughtul

respectul and nuanced engagements with each otherrsquos perspectives on some

o the most controversial topics that have inflamed our passions in the past

As Robert Millet reports in chapter two at that first Provo meeting we all

elt awkward and anxious sensing that we were stepping out on a path that

was pretty much uncharted o be sure we had a strong hint that something

good might come o our efforts Our joint decision to orm the dialogue

group had been influenced in good part by the appearance o a wonderul

volume How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conver-

sation published by InterVarsity Press in 1048625104863310486331048631 Indeed the coauthors o that

volume Stephen Robinson and Craig Blomberg were both present at our

first session on the Brigham Young campus We saw the two o them as

courageous pioneers who had been willing to take the risk o initiating a newkind o conversation and then o agreeing to go public with their provi-

sional assessments o the nature o the ldquodividerdquo And it also took some

courage or an evangelical press to publish what they were reporting But

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 931

10486251048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Stephen and Craig knew that they had only begun to scratch the surace and

that their explorations had to probe more deeply

For those o us who have contributed to this volume it is clear thatwe can look back to that first meeting in 1048626104862410486241048624 and saymdashto paraphrase

1048625 John 10486271048626 a text that loomed large in our later discussions o what it

means or humans to be ldquodivinizedrdquomdashthat it did not yet appear what

we could be in our commitment to becoming dialogue partners he

essays here show the great sensitivity and clarity we developed in our

eorts to build bridges across what in the past had looked like an un-

bridgeable divideWhile the essays in this book nicely document our efforts they also point

beyond themselves to more proound personal engagements that cannot be

captured in the written record For several o us representing evangelicalism

we will never orget our depth o eeling when we were gathered on the

eastern bank o the Mississippi River listening to a moving account by a

Latter-day Saints historian and colleague o what it was like or the Nauvoo

Mormons to flee rom that very spot westward afer the murder o Joseph

Smith in the nearby Carthage jail Or what is was like to grieve together over

the death rom cancer o one o our much-loved riends Brigham Young

Universityrsquos Paul Peterson whose lie we celebrated by singing together

ldquoHow Great Tou Artrdquo the one hymn that he had insisted be eatured at his

uneral Or what it meant to request each otherrsquos prayers in times o illness

or amily crisis

While those experiences have or many o us a significance or matters o

the heart this book o essays is an importantmdashyes an amazingmdashwritten

record o an intellectual journey taken together thus ar We publish these

essays at a time when we have paused to think about ways we might explore

new initiatives on several different ronts Where those initiatives might take

us in another fifeen years ldquodoth not yet appearrdquo But this volume serves as

an encouraging signpost on a path that we are firmly convinced is leading

us to more amazing engagements along the way

R983151983138983141983154983156 L M983145983148983148983141983156

For a very long timemdashlonger than should be the casemdashevangelical Chris-

tians and Latter-day Saints (Mormons) have ldquoenjoyedrdquo a relationship that

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1031

Prefaces by the Editors 10486251048625

could at best be described as guarded and suspicious and at worst as an-

tagonistic and hostile Evangelicals have seen their Mormon counterparts

as sheep stealers competitors or the souls o men and women enemies othe Christian aith Mormons have requently characterized evangelicals as

overly exclusionary arrogant and filled with rancor Consequently harsh

rhetoric and angry discourse have been the order o the day No matter what

ldquosiderdquo one may be on when observed rom a lofier perch such wranglings

surely must come across as anything but Christian an affront to the Saviorrsquos

plea in his great intercessory prayer that his ollowers those who proess

aith in his name all may be oneIn recent years however evangelicals and Mormons have requently

ound themselves laboring as cobelligerents against influences in our

world that threaten to tear at the very abric o our societymdashmilitant

atheism growing secularism ethical relativism and rontal attacks on

marriage the amily and religious liberty No doubt some measure o ner-

vousness has existed on the part o participants in these battles but at least

many socially active men and women on both ronts have had to ac-

knowledge that members o evangelical Christian churches and members

o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints share a common moral

code and both yearn or a better world or their children and grand-

children than now exists

In addition on a small scale to be sure there has been an effort underway

since 1048626104862410486241048624 at least among a handul belonging to both aith traditions to

better understand and appreciate one another an effort to speak cordially

to listen attentively and to discuss o all things theological matters even

theological differences Neither group came to the enterprise with an eccle-

siastical imprimatur in hand and neither group ever purported to represent

anything other than their own private views o what they believed In the

spring o 1048626104862410486241048624 at the top o the N Eldon anner Building at Brigham Young

University in Provo Utah a gathering o very anxious and uncertain reli-

gious scholars took place an endeavor that would affect the participants in

ways they never would have supposed It would result in riendships that

would prove to be long-lasting travel to various sites o ldquosacred spacerdquo or

each group and or some a new way o viewing onersquos ellow men and women

and the overall plans and purposes o Almighty God Tis book is the story

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1131

10486251048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

o that singular endeavor It is a report o the Mormon-evangelical dialogue

rom 1048626104862410486241048624ndash1048626104862410486251048628 a careul consideration o what took place at several o the

doctrinal discussions and what was decidedmdashdefinite and seemingly irrec-oncilable differences matters deserving o continued exploration and areas

o surprising similarity

In speaking o the ormative days o Mormonism one Latter-day Saint

leader Oliver Cowdery commented that ldquothese were days never to be or-

gottenrdquo And so it was with us Te Mormon-evangelical dialogue was a

distinctive and memorable experience one that has changed us or the

better Our sincere hope is that the reader will find the report o theseldquovexations o the soulrdquo to be not only intellectually stimulating and even

entertaining reading but also motivational in the sense o prompting

readers to reach out to those who are different to strike up a conversation

to listen with empathy and to be willing to learn and to be affected Richard

Mouw suggested in his important work Uncommon Decency that interaith

dialogue is always helped along by a healthy dose o curiosity and so we

extend the challenge to those who may read this book even i only in the

name o sheer curiosity to ldquogo and do thou likewiserdquo Te results just might

surprise you

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1231

983152983137983154983156 983151983150983141

T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1331

852017

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Backgrounds and Context

Derek J Bowen

E983158983137983150983143983141983148983145983139983137983148983155 983137983150983140 M983151983154983149983151983150983155 are relative newcomers to the

practice o interaith dialogue Te genesis o modern interaith dialogue is

generally traced back to the 104862585202410486331048627 Worldrsquos Parliament o Religions held in

conjunction with the Chicago Worldrsquos Fair1

Although Christianity largelydominated the conerence nine other religions were represented Mormons

and many evangelicals were among those groups missing and it wasnrsquot by

accident For Mormons their ldquorepresentation was not wanted nor solicited

by the organizers o the 104862585202410486331048627 Parliamentrdquo2 Even afer inclusion was reluc-

tantly granted urther discrimination caused the Mormon delegation to

walk out in protest As or evangelicals the identification o interaith dia-

logue with liberal Protestantism was enough to keep conservatives like

Dwight L Moody and the archbishop o Canterbury away rom the event

believing the parliament symbolized the compromise o Christianity3 Con-

sequently Mormons and evangelicals did not participate in the beginnings

and early practice o interaith dialoguemdashdue to the discriminatory ex-

clusion o Mormons as opposed to the deliberate avoidance o evangelicals

Despite their differing reasons or absence both groups have generally con-

tinued to remain aloo rom this movement or most o its existence Yet

ironically two o the groups most averse to interaith dialogue decades ago

now have among their ranks some o the greatest beneficiaries and practi-

tioners o the enterprise in the present-day Mormon-evangelical scholarly

dialogue It is equally surprising that the dialogue is specifically occurring

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 5: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 531

C983151983150983156983141983150983156983155

Preaces by the Editors 983097

Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet

P983137983154983156 983089 T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141 983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

983089 he Dialogue Backgrounds and Context 983089983093

Derek J Bowen

983090 Relections Ater Fiteen Years 983090983089

Robert L Millet

983091 What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 983090983096

J Spencer Fluhman

983092 Looking Ahead My Dreams or

Mormon-Evangelical Dialogues 983091983091

Craig L Blomberg

983093 Responding to Millet and Fluhman 983091983096

James E Bradley

983094 A Serious Call to Devout and Holy Dialogue

Going Deeper in Interaith Discussions 983092983089

Gerald R McDermott

983095 Apologetics as i People Mattered 983093983089

Dennis Okholm

983096 From Calvary to Cumorah

he Signiicance o ldquoSacred Spacerdquo 983094983088

Richard E Bennett

983097 Mormon-Evangelical Dialogue

Embracing a Hermeneutic o Generosity 983095983089

Rachel Cope

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 631

983089983088 emple Garments A Case Study in the Lived

Religion o Mormons 983096983088

Cory B Willson

983089983089 Mormons and Evangelicals in the Public Square 983097983088

J B Haws

983089983090 An Evangelical at Brigham Young University 983089983088983088

Sarah aylor

P983137983154983156 983090 S983152983141983139983145983142983145983139 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983137983148 D983145983155983139983157983155983155983145983151983150983155

983089983091 How Many Gods Mormons and Evangelicals

Discussing the Debate 983089983089983089

Craig L Blomberg

983089983092 he rinity 983089983090983093

Christopher A Hall

983089983093 Divine Investiture Mormonism and

the Concept o rinity 983089983091983090

Brian D Birch

983089983094 Praxis A Lived rinitarianism 983089983092983090

Bill Heersink

983089983095 heological Anthropology

he Origin and Nature o Human Beings 983089983092983095

Grant Underwood

983089983096 ldquoHow Great a Debtorrdquo Mormon Relections on Grace 983089983094983089

Camille Fronk Olson

983089983097 Authority Is Everything 983089983095983088

Robert L Millet

983090983088 Revealed ruth alking About Our Dierences 983089983095983095

Richard J Mouw

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 731

983090983089 wo Questions and Four Laws Missiological Relections

on LDS and Evangelical Missions in Port Moresby 983089983096983097

C Douglas McConnell

983090983090 Becoming as God 983090983088983088

Robert L Millet

983090983091 Is Mormonism Biblical 983090983088983095

J B Haws

Aterword 983090983089983097

Robert L Millet

Notes 983090983090983090

Contributors 983090983093983091

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 831

P983154983141983142983137983139983141983155 983138983161 983156983144983141 E983140983145983156983151983154983155

R983145983139983144983137983154983140 J M983151983157983159

Since I am one o the essay-writers in this book it is probably quite immodest

to say so but I will say it anyway this is an amazing collection o essays Even

i the essays were poorly donemdashwhich is certainly not the casemdashthis would

be an amazing book Who would have thought fifeen years ago that the group

o Mormons and evangelicals who gathered or the first time on the Provo

campus o Brigham Young University would eventually produce the kinds

o essays gathered in this volume Te past encounters between our two

aith communities had been rom the beginnings o Mormonism in the

early decades o the nineteenth century typified by angry accusations and

denunciatory rhetoric And now in the ollowing pages we find thoughtul

respectul and nuanced engagements with each otherrsquos perspectives on some

o the most controversial topics that have inflamed our passions in the past

As Robert Millet reports in chapter two at that first Provo meeting we all

elt awkward and anxious sensing that we were stepping out on a path that

was pretty much uncharted o be sure we had a strong hint that something

good might come o our efforts Our joint decision to orm the dialogue

group had been influenced in good part by the appearance o a wonderul

volume How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conver-

sation published by InterVarsity Press in 1048625104863310486331048631 Indeed the coauthors o that

volume Stephen Robinson and Craig Blomberg were both present at our

first session on the Brigham Young campus We saw the two o them as

courageous pioneers who had been willing to take the risk o initiating a newkind o conversation and then o agreeing to go public with their provi-

sional assessments o the nature o the ldquodividerdquo And it also took some

courage or an evangelical press to publish what they were reporting But

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 931

10486251048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Stephen and Craig knew that they had only begun to scratch the surace and

that their explorations had to probe more deeply

For those o us who have contributed to this volume it is clear thatwe can look back to that first meeting in 1048626104862410486241048624 and saymdashto paraphrase

1048625 John 10486271048626 a text that loomed large in our later discussions o what it

means or humans to be ldquodivinizedrdquomdashthat it did not yet appear what

we could be in our commitment to becoming dialogue partners he

essays here show the great sensitivity and clarity we developed in our

eorts to build bridges across what in the past had looked like an un-

bridgeable divideWhile the essays in this book nicely document our efforts they also point

beyond themselves to more proound personal engagements that cannot be

captured in the written record For several o us representing evangelicalism

we will never orget our depth o eeling when we were gathered on the

eastern bank o the Mississippi River listening to a moving account by a

Latter-day Saints historian and colleague o what it was like or the Nauvoo

Mormons to flee rom that very spot westward afer the murder o Joseph

Smith in the nearby Carthage jail Or what is was like to grieve together over

the death rom cancer o one o our much-loved riends Brigham Young

Universityrsquos Paul Peterson whose lie we celebrated by singing together

ldquoHow Great Tou Artrdquo the one hymn that he had insisted be eatured at his

uneral Or what it meant to request each otherrsquos prayers in times o illness

or amily crisis

While those experiences have or many o us a significance or matters o

the heart this book o essays is an importantmdashyes an amazingmdashwritten

record o an intellectual journey taken together thus ar We publish these

essays at a time when we have paused to think about ways we might explore

new initiatives on several different ronts Where those initiatives might take

us in another fifeen years ldquodoth not yet appearrdquo But this volume serves as

an encouraging signpost on a path that we are firmly convinced is leading

us to more amazing engagements along the way

R983151983138983141983154983156 L M983145983148983148983141983156

For a very long timemdashlonger than should be the casemdashevangelical Chris-

tians and Latter-day Saints (Mormons) have ldquoenjoyedrdquo a relationship that

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1031

Prefaces by the Editors 10486251048625

could at best be described as guarded and suspicious and at worst as an-

tagonistic and hostile Evangelicals have seen their Mormon counterparts

as sheep stealers competitors or the souls o men and women enemies othe Christian aith Mormons have requently characterized evangelicals as

overly exclusionary arrogant and filled with rancor Consequently harsh

rhetoric and angry discourse have been the order o the day No matter what

ldquosiderdquo one may be on when observed rom a lofier perch such wranglings

surely must come across as anything but Christian an affront to the Saviorrsquos

plea in his great intercessory prayer that his ollowers those who proess

aith in his name all may be oneIn recent years however evangelicals and Mormons have requently

ound themselves laboring as cobelligerents against influences in our

world that threaten to tear at the very abric o our societymdashmilitant

atheism growing secularism ethical relativism and rontal attacks on

marriage the amily and religious liberty No doubt some measure o ner-

vousness has existed on the part o participants in these battles but at least

many socially active men and women on both ronts have had to ac-

knowledge that members o evangelical Christian churches and members

o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints share a common moral

code and both yearn or a better world or their children and grand-

children than now exists

In addition on a small scale to be sure there has been an effort underway

since 1048626104862410486241048624 at least among a handul belonging to both aith traditions to

better understand and appreciate one another an effort to speak cordially

to listen attentively and to discuss o all things theological matters even

theological differences Neither group came to the enterprise with an eccle-

siastical imprimatur in hand and neither group ever purported to represent

anything other than their own private views o what they believed In the

spring o 1048626104862410486241048624 at the top o the N Eldon anner Building at Brigham Young

University in Provo Utah a gathering o very anxious and uncertain reli-

gious scholars took place an endeavor that would affect the participants in

ways they never would have supposed It would result in riendships that

would prove to be long-lasting travel to various sites o ldquosacred spacerdquo or

each group and or some a new way o viewing onersquos ellow men and women

and the overall plans and purposes o Almighty God Tis book is the story

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1131

10486251048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

o that singular endeavor It is a report o the Mormon-evangelical dialogue

rom 1048626104862410486241048624ndash1048626104862410486251048628 a careul consideration o what took place at several o the

doctrinal discussions and what was decidedmdashdefinite and seemingly irrec-oncilable differences matters deserving o continued exploration and areas

o surprising similarity

In speaking o the ormative days o Mormonism one Latter-day Saint

leader Oliver Cowdery commented that ldquothese were days never to be or-

gottenrdquo And so it was with us Te Mormon-evangelical dialogue was a

distinctive and memorable experience one that has changed us or the

better Our sincere hope is that the reader will find the report o theseldquovexations o the soulrdquo to be not only intellectually stimulating and even

entertaining reading but also motivational in the sense o prompting

readers to reach out to those who are different to strike up a conversation

to listen with empathy and to be willing to learn and to be affected Richard

Mouw suggested in his important work Uncommon Decency that interaith

dialogue is always helped along by a healthy dose o curiosity and so we

extend the challenge to those who may read this book even i only in the

name o sheer curiosity to ldquogo and do thou likewiserdquo Te results just might

surprise you

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1231

983152983137983154983156 983151983150983141

T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1331

852017

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Backgrounds and Context

Derek J Bowen

E983158983137983150983143983141983148983145983139983137983148983155 983137983150983140 M983151983154983149983151983150983155 are relative newcomers to the

practice o interaith dialogue Te genesis o modern interaith dialogue is

generally traced back to the 104862585202410486331048627 Worldrsquos Parliament o Religions held in

conjunction with the Chicago Worldrsquos Fair1

Although Christianity largelydominated the conerence nine other religions were represented Mormons

and many evangelicals were among those groups missing and it wasnrsquot by

accident For Mormons their ldquorepresentation was not wanted nor solicited

by the organizers o the 104862585202410486331048627 Parliamentrdquo2 Even afer inclusion was reluc-

tantly granted urther discrimination caused the Mormon delegation to

walk out in protest As or evangelicals the identification o interaith dia-

logue with liberal Protestantism was enough to keep conservatives like

Dwight L Moody and the archbishop o Canterbury away rom the event

believing the parliament symbolized the compromise o Christianity3 Con-

sequently Mormons and evangelicals did not participate in the beginnings

and early practice o interaith dialoguemdashdue to the discriminatory ex-

clusion o Mormons as opposed to the deliberate avoidance o evangelicals

Despite their differing reasons or absence both groups have generally con-

tinued to remain aloo rom this movement or most o its existence Yet

ironically two o the groups most averse to interaith dialogue decades ago

now have among their ranks some o the greatest beneficiaries and practi-

tioners o the enterprise in the present-day Mormon-evangelical scholarly

dialogue It is equally surprising that the dialogue is specifically occurring

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 6: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 631

983089983088 emple Garments A Case Study in the Lived

Religion o Mormons 983096983088

Cory B Willson

983089983089 Mormons and Evangelicals in the Public Square 983097983088

J B Haws

983089983090 An Evangelical at Brigham Young University 983089983088983088

Sarah aylor

P983137983154983156 983090 S983152983141983139983145983142983145983139 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983137983148 D983145983155983139983157983155983155983145983151983150983155

983089983091 How Many Gods Mormons and Evangelicals

Discussing the Debate 983089983089983089

Craig L Blomberg

983089983092 he rinity 983089983090983093

Christopher A Hall

983089983093 Divine Investiture Mormonism and

the Concept o rinity 983089983091983090

Brian D Birch

983089983094 Praxis A Lived rinitarianism 983089983092983090

Bill Heersink

983089983095 heological Anthropology

he Origin and Nature o Human Beings 983089983092983095

Grant Underwood

983089983096 ldquoHow Great a Debtorrdquo Mormon Relections on Grace 983089983094983089

Camille Fronk Olson

983089983097 Authority Is Everything 983089983095983088

Robert L Millet

983090983088 Revealed ruth alking About Our Dierences 983089983095983095

Richard J Mouw

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 731

983090983089 wo Questions and Four Laws Missiological Relections

on LDS and Evangelical Missions in Port Moresby 983089983096983097

C Douglas McConnell

983090983090 Becoming as God 983090983088983088

Robert L Millet

983090983091 Is Mormonism Biblical 983090983088983095

J B Haws

Aterword 983090983089983097

Robert L Millet

Notes 983090983090983090

Contributors 983090983093983091

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 831

P983154983141983142983137983139983141983155 983138983161 983156983144983141 E983140983145983156983151983154983155

R983145983139983144983137983154983140 J M983151983157983159

Since I am one o the essay-writers in this book it is probably quite immodest

to say so but I will say it anyway this is an amazing collection o essays Even

i the essays were poorly donemdashwhich is certainly not the casemdashthis would

be an amazing book Who would have thought fifeen years ago that the group

o Mormons and evangelicals who gathered or the first time on the Provo

campus o Brigham Young University would eventually produce the kinds

o essays gathered in this volume Te past encounters between our two

aith communities had been rom the beginnings o Mormonism in the

early decades o the nineteenth century typified by angry accusations and

denunciatory rhetoric And now in the ollowing pages we find thoughtul

respectul and nuanced engagements with each otherrsquos perspectives on some

o the most controversial topics that have inflamed our passions in the past

As Robert Millet reports in chapter two at that first Provo meeting we all

elt awkward and anxious sensing that we were stepping out on a path that

was pretty much uncharted o be sure we had a strong hint that something

good might come o our efforts Our joint decision to orm the dialogue

group had been influenced in good part by the appearance o a wonderul

volume How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conver-

sation published by InterVarsity Press in 1048625104863310486331048631 Indeed the coauthors o that

volume Stephen Robinson and Craig Blomberg were both present at our

first session on the Brigham Young campus We saw the two o them as

courageous pioneers who had been willing to take the risk o initiating a newkind o conversation and then o agreeing to go public with their provi-

sional assessments o the nature o the ldquodividerdquo And it also took some

courage or an evangelical press to publish what they were reporting But

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 931

10486251048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Stephen and Craig knew that they had only begun to scratch the surace and

that their explorations had to probe more deeply

For those o us who have contributed to this volume it is clear thatwe can look back to that first meeting in 1048626104862410486241048624 and saymdashto paraphrase

1048625 John 10486271048626 a text that loomed large in our later discussions o what it

means or humans to be ldquodivinizedrdquomdashthat it did not yet appear what

we could be in our commitment to becoming dialogue partners he

essays here show the great sensitivity and clarity we developed in our

eorts to build bridges across what in the past had looked like an un-

bridgeable divideWhile the essays in this book nicely document our efforts they also point

beyond themselves to more proound personal engagements that cannot be

captured in the written record For several o us representing evangelicalism

we will never orget our depth o eeling when we were gathered on the

eastern bank o the Mississippi River listening to a moving account by a

Latter-day Saints historian and colleague o what it was like or the Nauvoo

Mormons to flee rom that very spot westward afer the murder o Joseph

Smith in the nearby Carthage jail Or what is was like to grieve together over

the death rom cancer o one o our much-loved riends Brigham Young

Universityrsquos Paul Peterson whose lie we celebrated by singing together

ldquoHow Great Tou Artrdquo the one hymn that he had insisted be eatured at his

uneral Or what it meant to request each otherrsquos prayers in times o illness

or amily crisis

While those experiences have or many o us a significance or matters o

the heart this book o essays is an importantmdashyes an amazingmdashwritten

record o an intellectual journey taken together thus ar We publish these

essays at a time when we have paused to think about ways we might explore

new initiatives on several different ronts Where those initiatives might take

us in another fifeen years ldquodoth not yet appearrdquo But this volume serves as

an encouraging signpost on a path that we are firmly convinced is leading

us to more amazing engagements along the way

R983151983138983141983154983156 L M983145983148983148983141983156

For a very long timemdashlonger than should be the casemdashevangelical Chris-

tians and Latter-day Saints (Mormons) have ldquoenjoyedrdquo a relationship that

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1031

Prefaces by the Editors 10486251048625

could at best be described as guarded and suspicious and at worst as an-

tagonistic and hostile Evangelicals have seen their Mormon counterparts

as sheep stealers competitors or the souls o men and women enemies othe Christian aith Mormons have requently characterized evangelicals as

overly exclusionary arrogant and filled with rancor Consequently harsh

rhetoric and angry discourse have been the order o the day No matter what

ldquosiderdquo one may be on when observed rom a lofier perch such wranglings

surely must come across as anything but Christian an affront to the Saviorrsquos

plea in his great intercessory prayer that his ollowers those who proess

aith in his name all may be oneIn recent years however evangelicals and Mormons have requently

ound themselves laboring as cobelligerents against influences in our

world that threaten to tear at the very abric o our societymdashmilitant

atheism growing secularism ethical relativism and rontal attacks on

marriage the amily and religious liberty No doubt some measure o ner-

vousness has existed on the part o participants in these battles but at least

many socially active men and women on both ronts have had to ac-

knowledge that members o evangelical Christian churches and members

o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints share a common moral

code and both yearn or a better world or their children and grand-

children than now exists

In addition on a small scale to be sure there has been an effort underway

since 1048626104862410486241048624 at least among a handul belonging to both aith traditions to

better understand and appreciate one another an effort to speak cordially

to listen attentively and to discuss o all things theological matters even

theological differences Neither group came to the enterprise with an eccle-

siastical imprimatur in hand and neither group ever purported to represent

anything other than their own private views o what they believed In the

spring o 1048626104862410486241048624 at the top o the N Eldon anner Building at Brigham Young

University in Provo Utah a gathering o very anxious and uncertain reli-

gious scholars took place an endeavor that would affect the participants in

ways they never would have supposed It would result in riendships that

would prove to be long-lasting travel to various sites o ldquosacred spacerdquo or

each group and or some a new way o viewing onersquos ellow men and women

and the overall plans and purposes o Almighty God Tis book is the story

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1131

10486251048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

o that singular endeavor It is a report o the Mormon-evangelical dialogue

rom 1048626104862410486241048624ndash1048626104862410486251048628 a careul consideration o what took place at several o the

doctrinal discussions and what was decidedmdashdefinite and seemingly irrec-oncilable differences matters deserving o continued exploration and areas

o surprising similarity

In speaking o the ormative days o Mormonism one Latter-day Saint

leader Oliver Cowdery commented that ldquothese were days never to be or-

gottenrdquo And so it was with us Te Mormon-evangelical dialogue was a

distinctive and memorable experience one that has changed us or the

better Our sincere hope is that the reader will find the report o theseldquovexations o the soulrdquo to be not only intellectually stimulating and even

entertaining reading but also motivational in the sense o prompting

readers to reach out to those who are different to strike up a conversation

to listen with empathy and to be willing to learn and to be affected Richard

Mouw suggested in his important work Uncommon Decency that interaith

dialogue is always helped along by a healthy dose o curiosity and so we

extend the challenge to those who may read this book even i only in the

name o sheer curiosity to ldquogo and do thou likewiserdquo Te results just might

surprise you

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1231

983152983137983154983156 983151983150983141

T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1331

852017

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Backgrounds and Context

Derek J Bowen

E983158983137983150983143983141983148983145983139983137983148983155 983137983150983140 M983151983154983149983151983150983155 are relative newcomers to the

practice o interaith dialogue Te genesis o modern interaith dialogue is

generally traced back to the 104862585202410486331048627 Worldrsquos Parliament o Religions held in

conjunction with the Chicago Worldrsquos Fair1

Although Christianity largelydominated the conerence nine other religions were represented Mormons

and many evangelicals were among those groups missing and it wasnrsquot by

accident For Mormons their ldquorepresentation was not wanted nor solicited

by the organizers o the 104862585202410486331048627 Parliamentrdquo2 Even afer inclusion was reluc-

tantly granted urther discrimination caused the Mormon delegation to

walk out in protest As or evangelicals the identification o interaith dia-

logue with liberal Protestantism was enough to keep conservatives like

Dwight L Moody and the archbishop o Canterbury away rom the event

believing the parliament symbolized the compromise o Christianity3 Con-

sequently Mormons and evangelicals did not participate in the beginnings

and early practice o interaith dialoguemdashdue to the discriminatory ex-

clusion o Mormons as opposed to the deliberate avoidance o evangelicals

Despite their differing reasons or absence both groups have generally con-

tinued to remain aloo rom this movement or most o its existence Yet

ironically two o the groups most averse to interaith dialogue decades ago

now have among their ranks some o the greatest beneficiaries and practi-

tioners o the enterprise in the present-day Mormon-evangelical scholarly

dialogue It is equally surprising that the dialogue is specifically occurring

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 7: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 731

983090983089 wo Questions and Four Laws Missiological Relections

on LDS and Evangelical Missions in Port Moresby 983089983096983097

C Douglas McConnell

983090983090 Becoming as God 983090983088983088

Robert L Millet

983090983091 Is Mormonism Biblical 983090983088983095

J B Haws

Aterword 983090983089983097

Robert L Millet

Notes 983090983090983090

Contributors 983090983093983091

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 831

P983154983141983142983137983139983141983155 983138983161 983156983144983141 E983140983145983156983151983154983155

R983145983139983144983137983154983140 J M983151983157983159

Since I am one o the essay-writers in this book it is probably quite immodest

to say so but I will say it anyway this is an amazing collection o essays Even

i the essays were poorly donemdashwhich is certainly not the casemdashthis would

be an amazing book Who would have thought fifeen years ago that the group

o Mormons and evangelicals who gathered or the first time on the Provo

campus o Brigham Young University would eventually produce the kinds

o essays gathered in this volume Te past encounters between our two

aith communities had been rom the beginnings o Mormonism in the

early decades o the nineteenth century typified by angry accusations and

denunciatory rhetoric And now in the ollowing pages we find thoughtul

respectul and nuanced engagements with each otherrsquos perspectives on some

o the most controversial topics that have inflamed our passions in the past

As Robert Millet reports in chapter two at that first Provo meeting we all

elt awkward and anxious sensing that we were stepping out on a path that

was pretty much uncharted o be sure we had a strong hint that something

good might come o our efforts Our joint decision to orm the dialogue

group had been influenced in good part by the appearance o a wonderul

volume How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conver-

sation published by InterVarsity Press in 1048625104863310486331048631 Indeed the coauthors o that

volume Stephen Robinson and Craig Blomberg were both present at our

first session on the Brigham Young campus We saw the two o them as

courageous pioneers who had been willing to take the risk o initiating a newkind o conversation and then o agreeing to go public with their provi-

sional assessments o the nature o the ldquodividerdquo And it also took some

courage or an evangelical press to publish what they were reporting But

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 931

10486251048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Stephen and Craig knew that they had only begun to scratch the surace and

that their explorations had to probe more deeply

For those o us who have contributed to this volume it is clear thatwe can look back to that first meeting in 1048626104862410486241048624 and saymdashto paraphrase

1048625 John 10486271048626 a text that loomed large in our later discussions o what it

means or humans to be ldquodivinizedrdquomdashthat it did not yet appear what

we could be in our commitment to becoming dialogue partners he

essays here show the great sensitivity and clarity we developed in our

eorts to build bridges across what in the past had looked like an un-

bridgeable divideWhile the essays in this book nicely document our efforts they also point

beyond themselves to more proound personal engagements that cannot be

captured in the written record For several o us representing evangelicalism

we will never orget our depth o eeling when we were gathered on the

eastern bank o the Mississippi River listening to a moving account by a

Latter-day Saints historian and colleague o what it was like or the Nauvoo

Mormons to flee rom that very spot westward afer the murder o Joseph

Smith in the nearby Carthage jail Or what is was like to grieve together over

the death rom cancer o one o our much-loved riends Brigham Young

Universityrsquos Paul Peterson whose lie we celebrated by singing together

ldquoHow Great Tou Artrdquo the one hymn that he had insisted be eatured at his

uneral Or what it meant to request each otherrsquos prayers in times o illness

or amily crisis

While those experiences have or many o us a significance or matters o

the heart this book o essays is an importantmdashyes an amazingmdashwritten

record o an intellectual journey taken together thus ar We publish these

essays at a time when we have paused to think about ways we might explore

new initiatives on several different ronts Where those initiatives might take

us in another fifeen years ldquodoth not yet appearrdquo But this volume serves as

an encouraging signpost on a path that we are firmly convinced is leading

us to more amazing engagements along the way

R983151983138983141983154983156 L M983145983148983148983141983156

For a very long timemdashlonger than should be the casemdashevangelical Chris-

tians and Latter-day Saints (Mormons) have ldquoenjoyedrdquo a relationship that

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1031

Prefaces by the Editors 10486251048625

could at best be described as guarded and suspicious and at worst as an-

tagonistic and hostile Evangelicals have seen their Mormon counterparts

as sheep stealers competitors or the souls o men and women enemies othe Christian aith Mormons have requently characterized evangelicals as

overly exclusionary arrogant and filled with rancor Consequently harsh

rhetoric and angry discourse have been the order o the day No matter what

ldquosiderdquo one may be on when observed rom a lofier perch such wranglings

surely must come across as anything but Christian an affront to the Saviorrsquos

plea in his great intercessory prayer that his ollowers those who proess

aith in his name all may be oneIn recent years however evangelicals and Mormons have requently

ound themselves laboring as cobelligerents against influences in our

world that threaten to tear at the very abric o our societymdashmilitant

atheism growing secularism ethical relativism and rontal attacks on

marriage the amily and religious liberty No doubt some measure o ner-

vousness has existed on the part o participants in these battles but at least

many socially active men and women on both ronts have had to ac-

knowledge that members o evangelical Christian churches and members

o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints share a common moral

code and both yearn or a better world or their children and grand-

children than now exists

In addition on a small scale to be sure there has been an effort underway

since 1048626104862410486241048624 at least among a handul belonging to both aith traditions to

better understand and appreciate one another an effort to speak cordially

to listen attentively and to discuss o all things theological matters even

theological differences Neither group came to the enterprise with an eccle-

siastical imprimatur in hand and neither group ever purported to represent

anything other than their own private views o what they believed In the

spring o 1048626104862410486241048624 at the top o the N Eldon anner Building at Brigham Young

University in Provo Utah a gathering o very anxious and uncertain reli-

gious scholars took place an endeavor that would affect the participants in

ways they never would have supposed It would result in riendships that

would prove to be long-lasting travel to various sites o ldquosacred spacerdquo or

each group and or some a new way o viewing onersquos ellow men and women

and the overall plans and purposes o Almighty God Tis book is the story

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1131

10486251048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

o that singular endeavor It is a report o the Mormon-evangelical dialogue

rom 1048626104862410486241048624ndash1048626104862410486251048628 a careul consideration o what took place at several o the

doctrinal discussions and what was decidedmdashdefinite and seemingly irrec-oncilable differences matters deserving o continued exploration and areas

o surprising similarity

In speaking o the ormative days o Mormonism one Latter-day Saint

leader Oliver Cowdery commented that ldquothese were days never to be or-

gottenrdquo And so it was with us Te Mormon-evangelical dialogue was a

distinctive and memorable experience one that has changed us or the

better Our sincere hope is that the reader will find the report o theseldquovexations o the soulrdquo to be not only intellectually stimulating and even

entertaining reading but also motivational in the sense o prompting

readers to reach out to those who are different to strike up a conversation

to listen with empathy and to be willing to learn and to be affected Richard

Mouw suggested in his important work Uncommon Decency that interaith

dialogue is always helped along by a healthy dose o curiosity and so we

extend the challenge to those who may read this book even i only in the

name o sheer curiosity to ldquogo and do thou likewiserdquo Te results just might

surprise you

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1231

983152983137983154983156 983151983150983141

T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1331

852017

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Backgrounds and Context

Derek J Bowen

E983158983137983150983143983141983148983145983139983137983148983155 983137983150983140 M983151983154983149983151983150983155 are relative newcomers to the

practice o interaith dialogue Te genesis o modern interaith dialogue is

generally traced back to the 104862585202410486331048627 Worldrsquos Parliament o Religions held in

conjunction with the Chicago Worldrsquos Fair1

Although Christianity largelydominated the conerence nine other religions were represented Mormons

and many evangelicals were among those groups missing and it wasnrsquot by

accident For Mormons their ldquorepresentation was not wanted nor solicited

by the organizers o the 104862585202410486331048627 Parliamentrdquo2 Even afer inclusion was reluc-

tantly granted urther discrimination caused the Mormon delegation to

walk out in protest As or evangelicals the identification o interaith dia-

logue with liberal Protestantism was enough to keep conservatives like

Dwight L Moody and the archbishop o Canterbury away rom the event

believing the parliament symbolized the compromise o Christianity3 Con-

sequently Mormons and evangelicals did not participate in the beginnings

and early practice o interaith dialoguemdashdue to the discriminatory ex-

clusion o Mormons as opposed to the deliberate avoidance o evangelicals

Despite their differing reasons or absence both groups have generally con-

tinued to remain aloo rom this movement or most o its existence Yet

ironically two o the groups most averse to interaith dialogue decades ago

now have among their ranks some o the greatest beneficiaries and practi-

tioners o the enterprise in the present-day Mormon-evangelical scholarly

dialogue It is equally surprising that the dialogue is specifically occurring

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 8: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 831

P983154983141983142983137983139983141983155 983138983161 983156983144983141 E983140983145983156983151983154983155

R983145983139983144983137983154983140 J M983151983157983159

Since I am one o the essay-writers in this book it is probably quite immodest

to say so but I will say it anyway this is an amazing collection o essays Even

i the essays were poorly donemdashwhich is certainly not the casemdashthis would

be an amazing book Who would have thought fifeen years ago that the group

o Mormons and evangelicals who gathered or the first time on the Provo

campus o Brigham Young University would eventually produce the kinds

o essays gathered in this volume Te past encounters between our two

aith communities had been rom the beginnings o Mormonism in the

early decades o the nineteenth century typified by angry accusations and

denunciatory rhetoric And now in the ollowing pages we find thoughtul

respectul and nuanced engagements with each otherrsquos perspectives on some

o the most controversial topics that have inflamed our passions in the past

As Robert Millet reports in chapter two at that first Provo meeting we all

elt awkward and anxious sensing that we were stepping out on a path that

was pretty much uncharted o be sure we had a strong hint that something

good might come o our efforts Our joint decision to orm the dialogue

group had been influenced in good part by the appearance o a wonderul

volume How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conver-

sation published by InterVarsity Press in 1048625104863310486331048631 Indeed the coauthors o that

volume Stephen Robinson and Craig Blomberg were both present at our

first session on the Brigham Young campus We saw the two o them as

courageous pioneers who had been willing to take the risk o initiating a newkind o conversation and then o agreeing to go public with their provi-

sional assessments o the nature o the ldquodividerdquo And it also took some

courage or an evangelical press to publish what they were reporting But

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 931

10486251048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Stephen and Craig knew that they had only begun to scratch the surace and

that their explorations had to probe more deeply

For those o us who have contributed to this volume it is clear thatwe can look back to that first meeting in 1048626104862410486241048624 and saymdashto paraphrase

1048625 John 10486271048626 a text that loomed large in our later discussions o what it

means or humans to be ldquodivinizedrdquomdashthat it did not yet appear what

we could be in our commitment to becoming dialogue partners he

essays here show the great sensitivity and clarity we developed in our

eorts to build bridges across what in the past had looked like an un-

bridgeable divideWhile the essays in this book nicely document our efforts they also point

beyond themselves to more proound personal engagements that cannot be

captured in the written record For several o us representing evangelicalism

we will never orget our depth o eeling when we were gathered on the

eastern bank o the Mississippi River listening to a moving account by a

Latter-day Saints historian and colleague o what it was like or the Nauvoo

Mormons to flee rom that very spot westward afer the murder o Joseph

Smith in the nearby Carthage jail Or what is was like to grieve together over

the death rom cancer o one o our much-loved riends Brigham Young

Universityrsquos Paul Peterson whose lie we celebrated by singing together

ldquoHow Great Tou Artrdquo the one hymn that he had insisted be eatured at his

uneral Or what it meant to request each otherrsquos prayers in times o illness

or amily crisis

While those experiences have or many o us a significance or matters o

the heart this book o essays is an importantmdashyes an amazingmdashwritten

record o an intellectual journey taken together thus ar We publish these

essays at a time when we have paused to think about ways we might explore

new initiatives on several different ronts Where those initiatives might take

us in another fifeen years ldquodoth not yet appearrdquo But this volume serves as

an encouraging signpost on a path that we are firmly convinced is leading

us to more amazing engagements along the way

R983151983138983141983154983156 L M983145983148983148983141983156

For a very long timemdashlonger than should be the casemdashevangelical Chris-

tians and Latter-day Saints (Mormons) have ldquoenjoyedrdquo a relationship that

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1031

Prefaces by the Editors 10486251048625

could at best be described as guarded and suspicious and at worst as an-

tagonistic and hostile Evangelicals have seen their Mormon counterparts

as sheep stealers competitors or the souls o men and women enemies othe Christian aith Mormons have requently characterized evangelicals as

overly exclusionary arrogant and filled with rancor Consequently harsh

rhetoric and angry discourse have been the order o the day No matter what

ldquosiderdquo one may be on when observed rom a lofier perch such wranglings

surely must come across as anything but Christian an affront to the Saviorrsquos

plea in his great intercessory prayer that his ollowers those who proess

aith in his name all may be oneIn recent years however evangelicals and Mormons have requently

ound themselves laboring as cobelligerents against influences in our

world that threaten to tear at the very abric o our societymdashmilitant

atheism growing secularism ethical relativism and rontal attacks on

marriage the amily and religious liberty No doubt some measure o ner-

vousness has existed on the part o participants in these battles but at least

many socially active men and women on both ronts have had to ac-

knowledge that members o evangelical Christian churches and members

o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints share a common moral

code and both yearn or a better world or their children and grand-

children than now exists

In addition on a small scale to be sure there has been an effort underway

since 1048626104862410486241048624 at least among a handul belonging to both aith traditions to

better understand and appreciate one another an effort to speak cordially

to listen attentively and to discuss o all things theological matters even

theological differences Neither group came to the enterprise with an eccle-

siastical imprimatur in hand and neither group ever purported to represent

anything other than their own private views o what they believed In the

spring o 1048626104862410486241048624 at the top o the N Eldon anner Building at Brigham Young

University in Provo Utah a gathering o very anxious and uncertain reli-

gious scholars took place an endeavor that would affect the participants in

ways they never would have supposed It would result in riendships that

would prove to be long-lasting travel to various sites o ldquosacred spacerdquo or

each group and or some a new way o viewing onersquos ellow men and women

and the overall plans and purposes o Almighty God Tis book is the story

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1131

10486251048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

o that singular endeavor It is a report o the Mormon-evangelical dialogue

rom 1048626104862410486241048624ndash1048626104862410486251048628 a careul consideration o what took place at several o the

doctrinal discussions and what was decidedmdashdefinite and seemingly irrec-oncilable differences matters deserving o continued exploration and areas

o surprising similarity

In speaking o the ormative days o Mormonism one Latter-day Saint

leader Oliver Cowdery commented that ldquothese were days never to be or-

gottenrdquo And so it was with us Te Mormon-evangelical dialogue was a

distinctive and memorable experience one that has changed us or the

better Our sincere hope is that the reader will find the report o theseldquovexations o the soulrdquo to be not only intellectually stimulating and even

entertaining reading but also motivational in the sense o prompting

readers to reach out to those who are different to strike up a conversation

to listen with empathy and to be willing to learn and to be affected Richard

Mouw suggested in his important work Uncommon Decency that interaith

dialogue is always helped along by a healthy dose o curiosity and so we

extend the challenge to those who may read this book even i only in the

name o sheer curiosity to ldquogo and do thou likewiserdquo Te results just might

surprise you

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1231

983152983137983154983156 983151983150983141

T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1331

852017

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Backgrounds and Context

Derek J Bowen

E983158983137983150983143983141983148983145983139983137983148983155 983137983150983140 M983151983154983149983151983150983155 are relative newcomers to the

practice o interaith dialogue Te genesis o modern interaith dialogue is

generally traced back to the 104862585202410486331048627 Worldrsquos Parliament o Religions held in

conjunction with the Chicago Worldrsquos Fair1

Although Christianity largelydominated the conerence nine other religions were represented Mormons

and many evangelicals were among those groups missing and it wasnrsquot by

accident For Mormons their ldquorepresentation was not wanted nor solicited

by the organizers o the 104862585202410486331048627 Parliamentrdquo2 Even afer inclusion was reluc-

tantly granted urther discrimination caused the Mormon delegation to

walk out in protest As or evangelicals the identification o interaith dia-

logue with liberal Protestantism was enough to keep conservatives like

Dwight L Moody and the archbishop o Canterbury away rom the event

believing the parliament symbolized the compromise o Christianity3 Con-

sequently Mormons and evangelicals did not participate in the beginnings

and early practice o interaith dialoguemdashdue to the discriminatory ex-

clusion o Mormons as opposed to the deliberate avoidance o evangelicals

Despite their differing reasons or absence both groups have generally con-

tinued to remain aloo rom this movement or most o its existence Yet

ironically two o the groups most averse to interaith dialogue decades ago

now have among their ranks some o the greatest beneficiaries and practi-

tioners o the enterprise in the present-day Mormon-evangelical scholarly

dialogue It is equally surprising that the dialogue is specifically occurring

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 9: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 931

10486251048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Stephen and Craig knew that they had only begun to scratch the surace and

that their explorations had to probe more deeply

For those o us who have contributed to this volume it is clear thatwe can look back to that first meeting in 1048626104862410486241048624 and saymdashto paraphrase

1048625 John 10486271048626 a text that loomed large in our later discussions o what it

means or humans to be ldquodivinizedrdquomdashthat it did not yet appear what

we could be in our commitment to becoming dialogue partners he

essays here show the great sensitivity and clarity we developed in our

eorts to build bridges across what in the past had looked like an un-

bridgeable divideWhile the essays in this book nicely document our efforts they also point

beyond themselves to more proound personal engagements that cannot be

captured in the written record For several o us representing evangelicalism

we will never orget our depth o eeling when we were gathered on the

eastern bank o the Mississippi River listening to a moving account by a

Latter-day Saints historian and colleague o what it was like or the Nauvoo

Mormons to flee rom that very spot westward afer the murder o Joseph

Smith in the nearby Carthage jail Or what is was like to grieve together over

the death rom cancer o one o our much-loved riends Brigham Young

Universityrsquos Paul Peterson whose lie we celebrated by singing together

ldquoHow Great Tou Artrdquo the one hymn that he had insisted be eatured at his

uneral Or what it meant to request each otherrsquos prayers in times o illness

or amily crisis

While those experiences have or many o us a significance or matters o

the heart this book o essays is an importantmdashyes an amazingmdashwritten

record o an intellectual journey taken together thus ar We publish these

essays at a time when we have paused to think about ways we might explore

new initiatives on several different ronts Where those initiatives might take

us in another fifeen years ldquodoth not yet appearrdquo But this volume serves as

an encouraging signpost on a path that we are firmly convinced is leading

us to more amazing engagements along the way

R983151983138983141983154983156 L M983145983148983148983141983156

For a very long timemdashlonger than should be the casemdashevangelical Chris-

tians and Latter-day Saints (Mormons) have ldquoenjoyedrdquo a relationship that

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1031

Prefaces by the Editors 10486251048625

could at best be described as guarded and suspicious and at worst as an-

tagonistic and hostile Evangelicals have seen their Mormon counterparts

as sheep stealers competitors or the souls o men and women enemies othe Christian aith Mormons have requently characterized evangelicals as

overly exclusionary arrogant and filled with rancor Consequently harsh

rhetoric and angry discourse have been the order o the day No matter what

ldquosiderdquo one may be on when observed rom a lofier perch such wranglings

surely must come across as anything but Christian an affront to the Saviorrsquos

plea in his great intercessory prayer that his ollowers those who proess

aith in his name all may be oneIn recent years however evangelicals and Mormons have requently

ound themselves laboring as cobelligerents against influences in our

world that threaten to tear at the very abric o our societymdashmilitant

atheism growing secularism ethical relativism and rontal attacks on

marriage the amily and religious liberty No doubt some measure o ner-

vousness has existed on the part o participants in these battles but at least

many socially active men and women on both ronts have had to ac-

knowledge that members o evangelical Christian churches and members

o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints share a common moral

code and both yearn or a better world or their children and grand-

children than now exists

In addition on a small scale to be sure there has been an effort underway

since 1048626104862410486241048624 at least among a handul belonging to both aith traditions to

better understand and appreciate one another an effort to speak cordially

to listen attentively and to discuss o all things theological matters even

theological differences Neither group came to the enterprise with an eccle-

siastical imprimatur in hand and neither group ever purported to represent

anything other than their own private views o what they believed In the

spring o 1048626104862410486241048624 at the top o the N Eldon anner Building at Brigham Young

University in Provo Utah a gathering o very anxious and uncertain reli-

gious scholars took place an endeavor that would affect the participants in

ways they never would have supposed It would result in riendships that

would prove to be long-lasting travel to various sites o ldquosacred spacerdquo or

each group and or some a new way o viewing onersquos ellow men and women

and the overall plans and purposes o Almighty God Tis book is the story

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1131

10486251048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

o that singular endeavor It is a report o the Mormon-evangelical dialogue

rom 1048626104862410486241048624ndash1048626104862410486251048628 a careul consideration o what took place at several o the

doctrinal discussions and what was decidedmdashdefinite and seemingly irrec-oncilable differences matters deserving o continued exploration and areas

o surprising similarity

In speaking o the ormative days o Mormonism one Latter-day Saint

leader Oliver Cowdery commented that ldquothese were days never to be or-

gottenrdquo And so it was with us Te Mormon-evangelical dialogue was a

distinctive and memorable experience one that has changed us or the

better Our sincere hope is that the reader will find the report o theseldquovexations o the soulrdquo to be not only intellectually stimulating and even

entertaining reading but also motivational in the sense o prompting

readers to reach out to those who are different to strike up a conversation

to listen with empathy and to be willing to learn and to be affected Richard

Mouw suggested in his important work Uncommon Decency that interaith

dialogue is always helped along by a healthy dose o curiosity and so we

extend the challenge to those who may read this book even i only in the

name o sheer curiosity to ldquogo and do thou likewiserdquo Te results just might

surprise you

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1231

983152983137983154983156 983151983150983141

T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1331

852017

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Backgrounds and Context

Derek J Bowen

E983158983137983150983143983141983148983145983139983137983148983155 983137983150983140 M983151983154983149983151983150983155 are relative newcomers to the

practice o interaith dialogue Te genesis o modern interaith dialogue is

generally traced back to the 104862585202410486331048627 Worldrsquos Parliament o Religions held in

conjunction with the Chicago Worldrsquos Fair1

Although Christianity largelydominated the conerence nine other religions were represented Mormons

and many evangelicals were among those groups missing and it wasnrsquot by

accident For Mormons their ldquorepresentation was not wanted nor solicited

by the organizers o the 104862585202410486331048627 Parliamentrdquo2 Even afer inclusion was reluc-

tantly granted urther discrimination caused the Mormon delegation to

walk out in protest As or evangelicals the identification o interaith dia-

logue with liberal Protestantism was enough to keep conservatives like

Dwight L Moody and the archbishop o Canterbury away rom the event

believing the parliament symbolized the compromise o Christianity3 Con-

sequently Mormons and evangelicals did not participate in the beginnings

and early practice o interaith dialoguemdashdue to the discriminatory ex-

clusion o Mormons as opposed to the deliberate avoidance o evangelicals

Despite their differing reasons or absence both groups have generally con-

tinued to remain aloo rom this movement or most o its existence Yet

ironically two o the groups most averse to interaith dialogue decades ago

now have among their ranks some o the greatest beneficiaries and practi-

tioners o the enterprise in the present-day Mormon-evangelical scholarly

dialogue It is equally surprising that the dialogue is specifically occurring

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 10: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1031

Prefaces by the Editors 10486251048625

could at best be described as guarded and suspicious and at worst as an-

tagonistic and hostile Evangelicals have seen their Mormon counterparts

as sheep stealers competitors or the souls o men and women enemies othe Christian aith Mormons have requently characterized evangelicals as

overly exclusionary arrogant and filled with rancor Consequently harsh

rhetoric and angry discourse have been the order o the day No matter what

ldquosiderdquo one may be on when observed rom a lofier perch such wranglings

surely must come across as anything but Christian an affront to the Saviorrsquos

plea in his great intercessory prayer that his ollowers those who proess

aith in his name all may be oneIn recent years however evangelicals and Mormons have requently

ound themselves laboring as cobelligerents against influences in our

world that threaten to tear at the very abric o our societymdashmilitant

atheism growing secularism ethical relativism and rontal attacks on

marriage the amily and religious liberty No doubt some measure o ner-

vousness has existed on the part o participants in these battles but at least

many socially active men and women on both ronts have had to ac-

knowledge that members o evangelical Christian churches and members

o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints share a common moral

code and both yearn or a better world or their children and grand-

children than now exists

In addition on a small scale to be sure there has been an effort underway

since 1048626104862410486241048624 at least among a handul belonging to both aith traditions to

better understand and appreciate one another an effort to speak cordially

to listen attentively and to discuss o all things theological matters even

theological differences Neither group came to the enterprise with an eccle-

siastical imprimatur in hand and neither group ever purported to represent

anything other than their own private views o what they believed In the

spring o 1048626104862410486241048624 at the top o the N Eldon anner Building at Brigham Young

University in Provo Utah a gathering o very anxious and uncertain reli-

gious scholars took place an endeavor that would affect the participants in

ways they never would have supposed It would result in riendships that

would prove to be long-lasting travel to various sites o ldquosacred spacerdquo or

each group and or some a new way o viewing onersquos ellow men and women

and the overall plans and purposes o Almighty God Tis book is the story

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1131

10486251048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

o that singular endeavor It is a report o the Mormon-evangelical dialogue

rom 1048626104862410486241048624ndash1048626104862410486251048628 a careul consideration o what took place at several o the

doctrinal discussions and what was decidedmdashdefinite and seemingly irrec-oncilable differences matters deserving o continued exploration and areas

o surprising similarity

In speaking o the ormative days o Mormonism one Latter-day Saint

leader Oliver Cowdery commented that ldquothese were days never to be or-

gottenrdquo And so it was with us Te Mormon-evangelical dialogue was a

distinctive and memorable experience one that has changed us or the

better Our sincere hope is that the reader will find the report o theseldquovexations o the soulrdquo to be not only intellectually stimulating and even

entertaining reading but also motivational in the sense o prompting

readers to reach out to those who are different to strike up a conversation

to listen with empathy and to be willing to learn and to be affected Richard

Mouw suggested in his important work Uncommon Decency that interaith

dialogue is always helped along by a healthy dose o curiosity and so we

extend the challenge to those who may read this book even i only in the

name o sheer curiosity to ldquogo and do thou likewiserdquo Te results just might

surprise you

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1231

983152983137983154983156 983151983150983141

T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1331

852017

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Backgrounds and Context

Derek J Bowen

E983158983137983150983143983141983148983145983139983137983148983155 983137983150983140 M983151983154983149983151983150983155 are relative newcomers to the

practice o interaith dialogue Te genesis o modern interaith dialogue is

generally traced back to the 104862585202410486331048627 Worldrsquos Parliament o Religions held in

conjunction with the Chicago Worldrsquos Fair1

Although Christianity largelydominated the conerence nine other religions were represented Mormons

and many evangelicals were among those groups missing and it wasnrsquot by

accident For Mormons their ldquorepresentation was not wanted nor solicited

by the organizers o the 104862585202410486331048627 Parliamentrdquo2 Even afer inclusion was reluc-

tantly granted urther discrimination caused the Mormon delegation to

walk out in protest As or evangelicals the identification o interaith dia-

logue with liberal Protestantism was enough to keep conservatives like

Dwight L Moody and the archbishop o Canterbury away rom the event

believing the parliament symbolized the compromise o Christianity3 Con-

sequently Mormons and evangelicals did not participate in the beginnings

and early practice o interaith dialoguemdashdue to the discriminatory ex-

clusion o Mormons as opposed to the deliberate avoidance o evangelicals

Despite their differing reasons or absence both groups have generally con-

tinued to remain aloo rom this movement or most o its existence Yet

ironically two o the groups most averse to interaith dialogue decades ago

now have among their ranks some o the greatest beneficiaries and practi-

tioners o the enterprise in the present-day Mormon-evangelical scholarly

dialogue It is equally surprising that the dialogue is specifically occurring

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 11: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1131

10486251048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

o that singular endeavor It is a report o the Mormon-evangelical dialogue

rom 1048626104862410486241048624ndash1048626104862410486251048628 a careul consideration o what took place at several o the

doctrinal discussions and what was decidedmdashdefinite and seemingly irrec-oncilable differences matters deserving o continued exploration and areas

o surprising similarity

In speaking o the ormative days o Mormonism one Latter-day Saint

leader Oliver Cowdery commented that ldquothese were days never to be or-

gottenrdquo And so it was with us Te Mormon-evangelical dialogue was a

distinctive and memorable experience one that has changed us or the

better Our sincere hope is that the reader will find the report o theseldquovexations o the soulrdquo to be not only intellectually stimulating and even

entertaining reading but also motivational in the sense o prompting

readers to reach out to those who are different to strike up a conversation

to listen with empathy and to be willing to learn and to be affected Richard

Mouw suggested in his important work Uncommon Decency that interaith

dialogue is always helped along by a healthy dose o curiosity and so we

extend the challenge to those who may read this book even i only in the

name o sheer curiosity to ldquogo and do thou likewiserdquo Te results just might

surprise you

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1231

983152983137983154983156 983151983150983141

T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1331

852017

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Backgrounds and Context

Derek J Bowen

E983158983137983150983143983141983148983145983139983137983148983155 983137983150983140 M983151983154983149983151983150983155 are relative newcomers to the

practice o interaith dialogue Te genesis o modern interaith dialogue is

generally traced back to the 104862585202410486331048627 Worldrsquos Parliament o Religions held in

conjunction with the Chicago Worldrsquos Fair1

Although Christianity largelydominated the conerence nine other religions were represented Mormons

and many evangelicals were among those groups missing and it wasnrsquot by

accident For Mormons their ldquorepresentation was not wanted nor solicited

by the organizers o the 104862585202410486331048627 Parliamentrdquo2 Even afer inclusion was reluc-

tantly granted urther discrimination caused the Mormon delegation to

walk out in protest As or evangelicals the identification o interaith dia-

logue with liberal Protestantism was enough to keep conservatives like

Dwight L Moody and the archbishop o Canterbury away rom the event

believing the parliament symbolized the compromise o Christianity3 Con-

sequently Mormons and evangelicals did not participate in the beginnings

and early practice o interaith dialoguemdashdue to the discriminatory ex-

clusion o Mormons as opposed to the deliberate avoidance o evangelicals

Despite their differing reasons or absence both groups have generally con-

tinued to remain aloo rom this movement or most o its existence Yet

ironically two o the groups most averse to interaith dialogue decades ago

now have among their ranks some o the greatest beneficiaries and practi-

tioners o the enterprise in the present-day Mormon-evangelical scholarly

dialogue It is equally surprising that the dialogue is specifically occurring

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 12: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1231

983152983137983154983156 983151983150983141

T983144983141 N983137983156983157983154983141983151983142 983156983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1331

852017

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Backgrounds and Context

Derek J Bowen

E983158983137983150983143983141983148983145983139983137983148983155 983137983150983140 M983151983154983149983151983150983155 are relative newcomers to the

practice o interaith dialogue Te genesis o modern interaith dialogue is

generally traced back to the 104862585202410486331048627 Worldrsquos Parliament o Religions held in

conjunction with the Chicago Worldrsquos Fair1

Although Christianity largelydominated the conerence nine other religions were represented Mormons

and many evangelicals were among those groups missing and it wasnrsquot by

accident For Mormons their ldquorepresentation was not wanted nor solicited

by the organizers o the 104862585202410486331048627 Parliamentrdquo2 Even afer inclusion was reluc-

tantly granted urther discrimination caused the Mormon delegation to

walk out in protest As or evangelicals the identification o interaith dia-

logue with liberal Protestantism was enough to keep conservatives like

Dwight L Moody and the archbishop o Canterbury away rom the event

believing the parliament symbolized the compromise o Christianity3 Con-

sequently Mormons and evangelicals did not participate in the beginnings

and early practice o interaith dialoguemdashdue to the discriminatory ex-

clusion o Mormons as opposed to the deliberate avoidance o evangelicals

Despite their differing reasons or absence both groups have generally con-

tinued to remain aloo rom this movement or most o its existence Yet

ironically two o the groups most averse to interaith dialogue decades ago

now have among their ranks some o the greatest beneficiaries and practi-

tioners o the enterprise in the present-day Mormon-evangelical scholarly

dialogue It is equally surprising that the dialogue is specifically occurring

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 13: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1331

852017

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141

Backgrounds and Context

Derek J Bowen

E983158983137983150983143983141983148983145983139983137983148983155 983137983150983140 M983151983154983149983151983150983155 are relative newcomers to the

practice o interaith dialogue Te genesis o modern interaith dialogue is

generally traced back to the 104862585202410486331048627 Worldrsquos Parliament o Religions held in

conjunction with the Chicago Worldrsquos Fair1

Although Christianity largelydominated the conerence nine other religions were represented Mormons

and many evangelicals were among those groups missing and it wasnrsquot by

accident For Mormons their ldquorepresentation was not wanted nor solicited

by the organizers o the 104862585202410486331048627 Parliamentrdquo2 Even afer inclusion was reluc-

tantly granted urther discrimination caused the Mormon delegation to

walk out in protest As or evangelicals the identification o interaith dia-

logue with liberal Protestantism was enough to keep conservatives like

Dwight L Moody and the archbishop o Canterbury away rom the event

believing the parliament symbolized the compromise o Christianity3 Con-

sequently Mormons and evangelicals did not participate in the beginnings

and early practice o interaith dialoguemdashdue to the discriminatory ex-

clusion o Mormons as opposed to the deliberate avoidance o evangelicals

Despite their differing reasons or absence both groups have generally con-

tinued to remain aloo rom this movement or most o its existence Yet

ironically two o the groups most averse to interaith dialogue decades ago

now have among their ranks some o the greatest beneficiaries and practi-

tioners o the enterprise in the present-day Mormon-evangelical scholarly

dialogue It is equally surprising that the dialogue is specifically occurring

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 14: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1431

1048625852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

between Mormons and evangelicals two groups who take the Lordrsquos Great

Commission very seriously but who also share a long history o antagonism

toward one anotherSeveral actors coalesced to cause the Mormon-evangelical scholarly dia-

logue to occur by the late twentieth century One significant actor was the

loss o what many historians have reerred to as the American evangelical

Protestant empire o the nineteenth century4 Between the years 10486258520248520221048624 and

104862510486331048626852022 the population o the United States grew rom 10486271048625852021 million to over 104862510486251048631

million5 Although evangelicalism also grew during this time it could not

keep pace with the massive number o immigrants entering the country By104862585202410486331048624 Roman Catholicism surpassed Methodism as the single largest

Christian denomination in America and has remained so ever since6 In

addition to immigration Protestantismrsquos division into liberal and unda-

mentalist camps over issues like evolution and higher criticism o the Bible

urther weakened evangelical influence Tese and other developments

caused evangelicals to lose their majority statusmdashrom approximately hal

o the American population to 1048626852022 percent o Americans currently7 Although

their undamentalist orebears first reacted with a separatist approach neo-

evangelicals with their commitment to cultural engagement began to see

dialogue as a new method o evangelism For some evangelicals dialogue

became a means by which to negotiate the new reality o religious pluralism

as a smaller group within the American mosaic o religion8

Meanwhile a series o changes occurred within Mormonism that in

many ways brought it closer to evangelicalism in both doctrine and practice

Although early nineteenth-century Mormonism resembled evangelicalism

in many particulars the ollowers o Joseph Smith gradually ollowed a path

o radical differentiation rom the dominant Protestant culture o nine-

teenth-century America As Richard Mouw will discuss later in this volume

Latter-day Saints did not simply step orward and offer to the world new

books o Scripture they announced that God had chosen to restore the

prophetic office Mormonism introduced a worldview that combined the

temporal and the spiritual uniting religion with economics and politics (see

Doctrine and Covenants 1048626104863310486271048628) Mormonism introduced a priesthood hier-

archy and let it be known that the divine apostolic power to perorm salvific

ordinances (sacraments) the power once held by the early Christian church

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 15: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1531

he Dialogue 10486251048631

(Matthew 104862585202210486251048633 10486258520241048625852024) had been restored as well In other words in spite o

the act that Mormonism arose in a Protestant world its ecclesiastical

structure resembled Roman Catholicism And with the claim o modernprophets and continuing revelation came the renewal and spread o spiritual

gifs including the gif o tongues and the reports o miracles and signs and

angelic visitations By the end o Joseph Smithrsquos lie in 104862585202410486281048628 he had intro-

duced the practice o polygamy or plural marriage as well as the startling

and or some repulsive belie that men and women could become like God

Te Mormon movement into the twentieth century and into the tradi-

tional American society began quite dramatically in 104862585202410486331048624 when Latter-daySaints (LDS) Church president Wilord Woodruff declared an end to po-

lygamy From 104862585202410486331048624 on Mormonism ollowed a new path o assimilation into

American and evangelical cultural norms which to a great extent continues

today Besides orsaking polygamy in avor o monogamy Mormonism also

orsook communal economics or capitalism and theocratic politics or de-

mocracy9 Later social assimilation included joining the evangelical cause o

Prohibition a move that reflected the LDS adherence to what the Saints

called the ldquoWord o Wisdomrdquomdasha health law first introduced in 104862585202410486271048627mdasha ban

on alcohol tobacco tea and coffee By the early decades o the twentieth

century the complete observance o the Word o Wisdom became a re-

quirement or members in good standing to enter their temples10 Mor-

monism also adopted to some extent the anti-intellectual heritage o unda-

mentalism dismissing both evolution and scientism and looking askance at

what religionists came to know as the ldquohigher criticismrdquo o the Bible11 With

the later emergence o neo-evangelicalism Mormonism soon ound a moral

and political ally within the Republican Party who supported causes like

antiabortion legislation and traditional marriage amendments But none o

these changes would have been enough to oster the Mormon-evangelical

dialogue without accompanying shifs in Mormon theological emphases

wo related intellectual movements within Mormonism during the

twentieth century brought Mormon theology closer to evangelical doctrine

than ever beore Beginning around the mid-century point there was a

greater emphasis placed on the belie in an infinite God the plight o allen

humanity and salvation by the mercy and grace o God Sociologist Kendall

White has called this movement ldquoMormon neo-orthodoxyrdquo12 White argues

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 16: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1631

1048625852024 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

that Mormon neo-orthodoxy like Protestant neo-orthodoxy was a ldquocrisis

theologyrdquo in that both movements developed out o a response to the crisis

o modernity In the case o Mormonism White suggests that ldquoMormonshave traditionally believed in a finite God an optimistic assessment o

human nature and a doctrine o salvation by merit In contrast most

Mormon neo-orthodox theologians have tended to embrace the concept o

an absolute God a pessimistic assessment o human nature and a doctrine

o salvation by gracerdquo13 White proposes that a traditional Mormonism

somewhat compatible with modernism gave way to a Mormon neo-

orthodoxy compatible with evangelicalism and to some extent undamen-talism Observing such change Richard Mouw wondered in a 1048625104863310486331048625 Chris-

tianity oday article whether an ldquoEvangelical Mormonismrdquo was developing14

Building on the oundation o Mormon neo-orthodoxy John-Charles

Duffy has suggested that another intellectual movement developed one he

coins ldquoMormon Progressive Orthodoxyrdquo15 Duffy defines Mormon Pro-

gressive Orthodoxy as ldquothe effort to mitigate Mormon sectarianism the

rejection o Mormon liberalism and the desire to make Mormon super-

naturalism more intellectually crediblerdquo16 Some observers o the Mormon-

evangelical dialogue would classiy a majority o the LDS participants in

the dialogue as adherents o Mormon Progressive Orthodoxy although

none have specifically identified themselves as such Te recognition o

such developments has brought some evangelicals to the dialogue table in

order to encourage what they perceive as spiritually healthy developments

within the LDS aith (Most o the LDS dialogists would however claim

that they have no such inclinations or ambitions only a desire to assist their

evangelical brothers and sisters to come to appreciate the ldquoChristianrdquo oun-

dations o Mormonism)

Into these prime conditions walked Pastor Gregory C V Johnson o

ldquoStanding ogetherrdquo a parachurch evangelical ministry in Utah17 As a young

child Johnson had joined the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints

with his amily but later as a teenager converted to evangelicalism ollowing

what he describes as a born-again experience Tis joint experience with and

exposure to both Mormonism and evangelicalism created a natural inter-

aith dialogue within Johnson himsel a passion to help bridge what had or

decades been an unbridgeable gul Over time this inner dialogue organi-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 17: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1731

he Dialogue 10486251048633

cally evolved into an outer dialogue between groups o Mormons and evan-

gelicals organized by Johnson As student body president o Denver Sem-

inary Johnson introduced one o his proessors Craig Blomberg to religionproessor Stephen Robinson o Brigham Young University (BYU) Trough

their interaction and with the encouragement o Johnson in 1048625104863310486331048631 Blomberg

and Robinson wrote How Wide the Divide A Mormon and an Evangelical

in Conversation (InterVarsity Press) As the first public step toward a more

ormal Mormon-evangelical scholarly dialogue the book received a mixed

review o praise and disdain Most o the Mormon appraisal was positive

whereas the evangelical assessment was generally split between encouragingremarks rom scholars and bitter criticism rom proessional counter-

cultists18 In April o 1048625104863310486331048631 Johnson became acquainted with BYU religion

proessor Robert L Millet and their monthly lunch conversations gradually

evolved into a public orum titled ldquoA Mormon and an Evangelical in Con-

versationrdquo a two-hour program that discussed the value o religious ex-

change and also addressed doctrinal similarities and differences between

the two aith traditions o date Millet and Johnson have been invited to

hold their public dialogues some seventy times to churches (both LDS and

evangelical) universities civic organizations and law schools throughout

the United States Canada and even in Great Britain Besides their own pre-

sentations Millet and Johnson helped organize an interaith gathering ldquoAn

Evening o Friendshiprdquo in the Salt Lake Mormon abernacle with Christian

apologist Ravi Zacharias in 1048626104862410486241048628 the first time an evangelical had spoken

in that venue since Dwight L Moody in 104862585202410486331048633 Zacharias returned to the

abernacle a decade later to a packed house

Afer three years o meeting together Johnson suggested to Millet the

possibility o expanding their conversation to include scholars rom both

aiths Tis resulted in a semiannual dialogue that has continued since 1048626104862410486241048624

Te first meeting occurred at Brigham Young University in Provo Utah

Among the first evangelical participants were Greg Johnson Richard Mouw

(Fuller Teological Seminary) Craig Blomberg (Denver Seminary) Craig

Hazen (Biola University) David Neff (editor o Christianity oday ) and Carl

Moser at the time a doctoral student in Scotland and later a proessor o

religion at Eastern University in Philadelphia On the LDS side participants

included Robert Millet Stephen Robinson Roger Keller David Paulsen

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 18: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1831

10486261048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

Daniel Judd and Andrew Skinner all rom BYU19 Additions and subtrac-

tions in participants have taken place over the years

Te participants would come ldquoprepared (through readings o articles andbooks) to discuss a number o doctrinal subjects including the Fall

Atonement Scripture Revelation Grace and Works rinityGodhead the

Corporeality o God TeosisDeification Authority and Joseph Smithrsquos

First Visionrdquo20 Meetings have been held at Brigham Young University Fuller

Teological Seminary Wheaton College the Mormon historical sites o

Palmyra New York and Nauvoo Illinois and at meetings o the American

Academy o Religion and the Society o Biblical Literature21

Afer meeting some twenty-our times it was determined in the summer

o 1048626104862410486251048628 that the dialogue in its current iteration had served its purpose

Convicted civility had become the order o things in the gatherings trust

and respect and empathy had been established doctrinal clarity on both

sides had come to pass and lasting riendships had been ormed More than

two or three had gathered many times in the name o the Lord Jesus Christ

and it was the consensus o the dialogue team that his Spirit and his appro-

bation had been elt again and again

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 19: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 1931

852018

R983141983142983148983141983139983156983145983151983150983155 A983142983156983141983154F983145983142983156983141983141983150 Y983141983137983154983155

Robert L Millet

I983150 983089983097983097983089 983150983151983156 983148983151983150983143 983137983142983156983141983154 I 983159983137983155 983137983152983152983151983145983150983156983141983140 dean o religious

education at Brigham Young University one o the senior leaders o the LDS

Church counseled me ldquoBob you must find ways to reach out Find ways to

build bridges o riendship and understanding with persons o other aithsrdquo

Tat charge has weighed on my mind since then

o be able to articulate your aith to someone who is not o your aith is

a good discipline one that requires you to check careully your own vo-

cabulary your own terminology and make sure that people not only under-

stand you but also could not misunderstand you Mormons and evangelicals

have a similar vocabulary but ofen have different definitions and meanings

or those words Consequently effective communication is a strenuous en-

deavor o some degree we have been orced to reexamine our paradigms

our theological oundations our own understanding o things in a way that

enables us to talk and listen and digest and proceed

T983144983141 D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 B983141983143983145983150983155

Derek Bowen has just provided a useul historical background or the dialogue

Let me begin by suggesting that in the early sessions it was not uncommon to

sense a bit o tension a subtle uncertainty as to where this was going a slightuneasiness among the participants As the dialogue began to take shape it was

apparent that we were searching or an identitymdashwas this to be a conron-

tation A debate Was it to produce a winner and a loser Just how candid and

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 20: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2031

10486261048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

earnest were we expected to be Some o the Latter-day Saints wondered Do

the ldquoother guysrdquo see this encounter as a grand effort to set Mormonism straight

to make it more traditionally Christian more acceptable to skeptical on-lookers Some o the evangelicals wondered Is what they are saying an ac-

curate expression o LDS belie Can a person be a genuine Christian and yet

not be a part o the larger body o Christ A question that continues to come

up is just how much ldquobad theologyrdquo can the grace o God compensate or

Beore too long those kinds o issues became part o the dialogue itsel and

in the process much o the tension began to dissipate

Tese meetings have been more than conversations We have visited keyhistorical sites eaten and socialized sung hymns and prayed mourned to-

gether over the passing o members o our group and shared ideas books

and articles throughout the year Te initial eeling o ormality has given

way to a sweet inormality a brother-and-sisterhood a kindness in dis-

agreement a respect or opposing views and a eeling o responsibility

toward those not o our aithmdasha responsibility to represent their doctrines

and practices accurately to olks o our own aith No one has compromised

or diluted his or her own theological convictions but everyone has sought

to demonstrate the kind o civility that ought to characterize a mature ex-

change o ideas among a body o believers who have discarded deensiveness

No dialogue o this type is worth its salt unless the participants gradually

begin to realize that there is much to be learned rom the others

E983150983143983137983143983145983150983143 C983144983137983148983148983141983150983143983141983155

Progress has not come about easily rue dialogue is tough sledding hard

work In my own lie it has entailed first a tremendous amount o reading

o Christian history Christian theology and more particularly evangelical

thought I cannot very well enter into their world and their way o thinking

unless I immerse mysel in their literature Tis is particularly difficult when

such efforts come out o your own hide that is when you must do it above

and beyond everything else you are required to do It takes a significant

investment o time energy and money

Second while we have sought rom the beginning to ensure that the

proper balance o academic backgrounds in history philosophy and the-

ology are represented in the dialogue it soon became clear that perhaps

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 21: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2131

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048627

more critical than intellectual acumen was a nondeensive clearheaded

thick-skinned persistent but pleasant personality Kindness works really

well also Tose steeped in apologetics whether LDS or evangelical ace aspecial hurdle an uphill battle in this regard We agreed early on or ex-

ample that we would not take the time to address every anti-Mormon po-

lemic any more than a Christian-Muslim dialogue would spend appreciable

time evaluating proos o whether Muhammad actually entertained the

angel Gabriel Furthermore and this is much more difficult we agreed as a

larger team to a rather high standard o loyaltymdashthat we would not say

anything privately about the other guys that we would not say in publicTird as close as we have become as warm and congenial as the dia-

logues have proven to be there is still an underlying premise that guides

most o the evangelical participants that Mormonism is the tradition that

needs to do the changing i progress is to be orthcoming o be sure the

LDS dialogists have become well aware that we are not well understood and

that many o our theological positions need clariying oo ofen however

the implication is that i the Mormons can only alter this or drop that then

we will be getting somewhere As LDS participant Spencer Fluhman noted

sometimes we seem to be holding ldquotryouts or Christianityrdquo with the Latter-

day Saints A number o the LDS cohort have voiced this concern and sug-

gested that it just might be a healthy exercise or the evangelicals to do a bit

more introspection to consider that this enterprise is in act a dialogue a

mutual conversation one where long-term progress will come only as both

sides are convinced that there is much to be learned rom one another in-

cluding doctrine

A ourth challenge is one we did not anticipate In evangelicalism on the

one hand there is no organizational structure no priestly hierarchy no

living prophet or magisterium to proclaim the ldquofinal wordrdquo on doctrine or

practice although there are supporting organizations like the National As-

sociation o Evangelicals and the Evangelical Teological Society On the

other hand Mormonism is clearly a top-down organization the final word

resting with the First Presidency and the Quorum o the welve Apostles

Tus our dialogue team might very well make phenomenal progress toward

a shared understanding on doctrine but evangelicals around the world will

not see our conclusions as in any way binding or perhaps even relevant

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 22: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2231

10486261048628 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 T983151983152983145983139983155

Te first dialogue held at Brigham Young University in the spring o 1048626104862410486241048624

was as much an effort to test the waters as to dialogue on a specific topic Butthe group did agree to do some reading prior to the gathering Te evan-

gelicals asked that we all read or reread John Stottrsquos classic work Basic Chris-

tianity (Downers Grove IL InterVarsity Press Grand Rapids Eerdmans

10486251048633852021852024) and some o my LDS colleagues recommended that we read a book I

had written titled Te Mormon Faith (Salt Lake City Shadow Mountain

104862510486331048633852024) We spent much o a day discussing Te Mormon Faith concluding

that there were a number o theological topics deserving extended conver-sation in the uture

When it came time to discuss Basic Christianity we had a most unusual

and unexpected experience Richard Mouw asked ldquoWell what concerns or

questions do you have about this bookrdquo Tere was a long and somewhat

uncomortable silence Rich ollowed up afer about a minute ldquoIsnrsquot there

anything you have to say Did we all read the bookrdquo Everyone nodded a-

firmatively that they had indeed read it but no one seemed to have anyquestions Finally one o the LDS participants responded ldquoStott is essen-

tially writing o New estament Christianity with which we have no quarrel

He does not wander into the creedal ormulations that came rom Nicaea

Constantinople or Chalcedon We agree with his assessment o Jesus Christ

and his gospel as presented in the New estament Good bookrdquo Tat

comment was an important one as it signaled where we would eventually

lock our theological horns

In the second dialogue located at Fuller Seminary we chose to discuss

the matter o soteriology and much o the conversation was taken up with

where divine grace and aithul obedience (good works) fit into the

equation o salvation Te evangelicals insisted that Mormon theology did

not seem to contain a provision or the unmerited divine avor o God and

that Mormons sometimes appeared to be obsessed with a kind o works

righteousness Te LDS crowd retorted that what they had observed quite

ofen among evangelicals was what Bonhoeffer had described as ldquocheap

gracerdquo a kind o easy believism that requently resulted in spiritually un-

azed and unchanged people oward the end o the discussion one o the

Mormons Stephen Robinson asked the group to turn in their copies o

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 23: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2331

Reflections After Fifteen Years 1048626852021

the Book o Mormon (each participant came prepared with a Bible and

the LDS books o Scripture what is called the ldquotriple combinationrdquo) to

several passages in which the text stressed the act that we are saved onlythrough the merits and mercy and grace o the Holy Messiah Afer an

extended silence I remember hearing one o the evangelicals say almost

in a whisper ldquoSounds pretty Christian to merdquo Over the years most o us

have concluded that in regard to this particular topic our two traditions

are ar closer than we had anticipated

One o the most memorable o all our discussions centered on the

concept o theosis or divinization the doctrine espoused by Latter-daySaints and also a vital acet o Eastern Orthodoxy For this dialogue we

invited Veli-Matti Kaumlrkkaumlinen proessor o theology at Fuller Seminary to

lead our discussion In preparation or the dialogue we read his book One

with God Salvation as Deification and Justification (Collegeville MN Li-

turgical Press 1048626104862410486241048628) as well as LDS writings on the topic It seemed to me

that in this particular exchange there was much less effort on the part o

evangelicals to ldquofix Mormonismrdquo Instead the conversation generated much

reflection and introspection among the entire group Mormons commented

on how little work they had done on this subject beyond the bounds o

Mormonism and they ound themselves ascinated with such expressions

as participation in God union with God assimilation into God receiving

o Godrsquos energies and not his essence and divine-human synergy More

than one o the evangelicals asked how they could essentially have ignored

a matter that was a part o the discourse o Athanasius Augustine Irenaeus

Gregory o Nazianzus and even Martin Luther Tere was much less said

about ldquoyou and your aithrdquo and ar more emphasis on ldquowerdquo as proessing

Christians in this setting

Not long afer our dialogue on deification Rich Mouw suggested that we

not meet next time in Provo but rather in Nauvoo Illinois Nauvoo was o

course a major historical moment (104862585202410486271048633ndash10486258520241048628852022) within Mormonism the

place where the Mormons were able to establish a significant presence

where some o Joseph Smithrsquos deepest (and most controversial) doctrines

were delivered to the Saints and the site rom which Brigham Young and the

Mormon pioneers began the long exodus to the Salt Lake Basin in February

10486258520241048628852022 Because a large percentage o the original dwellings meetinghouses

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 24: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2431

1048626852022 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

places o business and even the temple have been restored in modern

Nauvoo our dialogue was ramed by the historical setting and resulted in

perhaps the greatest blending o hearts o any dialogue we have hadwo years later we met in Palmyra New York and once again ocused

much o our attention on historical sites rom the Sacred Grove (where

Joseph Smith claimed to have received his first vision) to Fayette where the

Church was ormally organized on April 852022 104862585202410486271048624 We had reaffirmed what

we had come to know quite well in Nauvoomdashthat there is in act something

special about ldquosacred spacerdquo (Proessor Richard Bennett will address ldquosacred

spacerdquo in a subsequent essay in this book) Probing discussions o authorityScripturerevelation the possibility o modern prophets and the nature o

God and the Godhead (rinity) have also taken place

As we began our second decade in 1048626104862410486251048625 it was suggested that we start over

and make our way slowly through Christian history until we came to Nicaea

(983137983140 10486271048626852021) at which point we could discuss in more depth the theological

developments that now divide us Consequently we have now held three

additional sessions on the doctrine o the rinityGodhead probing conver-

sations that have been both intellectually stretching and spiritually uplifing

Te articles by Craig Blomberg Chris Hall and Brian Birch later in this

volume address our dialogues on these topics

L983151983151983147983145983150983143 A983144983141983137983140

In pondering the uture there are certain developments I would love to see

take place in the next decade I would hope that the Church o Jesus Christ

o Latter-day Saints would become a bit more confident and secure in its

distinctive theological perspectives and thus less prone to be thin-skinned

easily offended and reactionary when those perspectives are questioned or

challenged In that light I sense that we Mormons have to decide what we

want to be when we grow up that is do we want to be known as a separate

and distinct maniestation o Christianity (restored Christianity) or do we

want to have traditional Christians conclude that we are just like they are

You canrsquot have it both ways And i you insist that you are different you canrsquot

very well pout about being placed in a different category In addition it

would be wonderul i LDS interaith efforts o the uture would receive the

kind o institutional encouragement or which some o the early partici-

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 25: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2531

Reflections After Fifteen Years 10486261048631

pants o this endeavor have yearned so ofen Ofen this interreligious effort

has been a lot like walking the plank alone It gets pretty lonely out there

sometimesOn the other hand I long or a kinder gentler brand o evangelicalism

one that is less prone to consign to perdition anyone who sees things differ-

ently one that holds tightly to its doctrinal tenets but is more concerned

with welcoming and including than with dismissing and excluding one that

is more eager to delight people with the glories o heaven than with terri-

ying and threatening them with the fires o hell Rob Bellrsquos book Love Wins

(San Francisco HarperOne 1048626104862410486251048625) may cause some evangelicals to believethe author is a universalist (which I do not) and others to cry heresy but it

seems to me that he is asking all the right questions Te image o Christi-

anity is at stake and some outside the old may well be justified in won-

dering where the ldquogood newsrdquo is to be ound

Well now that I have offended both sides let me try to be a bit prescient

Looking ahead I see two proessing Christian bodies who in spite o their

differences (which are significant to be sure) have learned to talk and listen

and digest have learned to communicate respectully about those differ-

ences and celebrate their similarities I see two groups who have learned to

work together as cobelligerents in stemming the tide o creeping secularism

standing united in proclaiming absolute truths and moral values and

fighting courageously in deense o the amily and traditional marriage We

have a society to rescue and rankly there is something more undamental

and basic than theology and that is our shared humanity We are first and

oremost sons and daughters o Almighty God and we have been charged

to let our light shine in a world that is becoming ever darker a world that

hungers or the only lasting solution to the worldrsquos problemsmdashthe person

and powers o Jesus Christ Only through him will society be ully trans-

ormed and renewed

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 26: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2631

852019

W983144983137983156 D983154983141983159 M983141 983156983151D983145983137983148983151983143983157983141 983137983150983140 W983144983161Irsquo983149 S983156983145983148983148 T983137983148983147983145983150983143

J Spencer Fluhman

I 983140983145983140 983150983151983156 983141983160983152983141983139983156 983156983151 983155983152983141983150983140 983161983141983137983154983155 in theological conversation

with evangelicals My autobiographical details in act might have predicted

something else entirely Growing up in a densely Mormon Utah neigh-borhood I viewed non-Mormons with suspicion My parents were big-

hearted Latter-day Saints who never taught anything but love but somehow

I was wary o the Protestant church across the street rom my boyhood

home As kids we would gallop down its hallway on hot summer days buy

our cold 1048631-Up (we could scarcely believe they put a vending machine in a

church) and sprint out as i the devil himsel was on our heels I was scared

o the pastor and sensed that some chasm separated us rom his congregantsTese negative perceptions were reinorced during my years as an LDS mis-

sionary in Virginia and Maryland where the ldquoborn-againsrdquomdashwe turned the

phrase into a pejorative nounmdashunquestionably hated us most At one point

I ound mysel staring down the barrel o a rifle wielded by a good Christian

we learned later who apparently had little interest in Mormonism (We

didnrsquot stop to ask) I lef those two years sure that evangelicals were the least

Christian people on earth

My views started to change in graduate school raining in American re-

ligious history provided new understandings o my churchrsquos past and the

ways it had been shaped by mistrust and violence on all sides I also had to

reckon with a memorable evangelical cast o historical characters (John

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 27: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2731

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486261048633

Calvin Jonathan Edwards Charles G Finney etc) and their gifed evan-

gelical chroniclers (Mark Noll George Marsden Nathan Hatch etc) Tese

academic experiences blunted much o my contempt but it was a series orelational developments that drew me into sustained conversation with evan-

gelicals Shortly afer my appointment to the aculty at Brigham Young Uni-

versity a colleague invited me to meet with evangelical students visiting

campus Afer spending an exhilarating ew hours with them it was clear to

me that Irsquod happened onto an altogether different set o evangelicals Indeed

afer accepting another invitation to meet with the LDS-evangelical scholarly

dialogue group in 1048626104862410486241048631 I was convinced that my youthul appraisals o evan-gelicalism had been woeully one-sided Having become acquainted with the

history o American ecumenism it also struck me that this dialogue was

rather uniquemdasheven strange in many ways Even so I came to believe that it

offered hope or a better kind o conversation between our two communities

Even as I strain against some o what I take to be its pitalls the dialogue

has ed both mind and heart I coness to somewhat selfish motives at first

I was sure I was watching something historically significant that would si-

multaneously bolster my pedagogy (I teach courses on American religious

history and hunger or insight into evangelicalism) Tis intellectual curi-

osity continues to uel my involvement rankly And in the end I hope to

offer evangelicals what I seek rom them I want to represent their aith in a

way that does justice to its richness and complexity I am by no means an

apologist or evangelicalism but I would hope that evangelicals could rec-

ognize themselves in my descriptions I certainly would not want to misrep-

resent them in any way and I credit the dialogue or providing me more

nuanced understandings I once joked with Richard Mouw that hersquos ldquoearned

the rightrdquo afer countless hours with us to comment on Mormonism I hope

Irsquove done my part with evangelicalism

Te dialogue has also provided countless opportunities to sharpen un-

derstanding o my own aith historically and theologically Comparative

projects orce these kinds o insights Irsquove learned I wondered when joining

the dialoguemdashand still domdashhow two communities without institutionally

driven systematic theologies can even presume a theological dialogue but

it turns out that our conversations never ail to interest me Tey help me

see more clearly where we might intersect and where we can emphatically

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 28: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2831

10486271048624 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

disagree But or me even the disagreements have been productive rather

than destructive (as I ofen experienced them as an LDS missionary) By

locating rigorous academic conversations in relationships o trust that havebeen cultivated over time we find ourselves able to articulate differences

without recourse to derision stereotyping or dismissal For instance I am

willing to take Calvinism seriouslymdashnot something I was historically in-

clined to domdashin part because o my admiration or the Calvinists I now

count as riends

I sensed early on that some dialogue members approached it as a kind o

Mormon audition or ldquoauthentic Christianrdquo status Such a thing has neverinterested me In act I spent my first year in the dialogue complaining that

it seemed to implicitly interrogate Mormonism only I elt and still eel that

to do so would only inhibit real communication I was touched when the

evangelical members not only heard my complaint about power dynamics

but also took pains to ensure that the conversations evolved to place the two

traditions on more even ooting Even so we struggle with undamental

questions Why are we still talking Where are our conversations going

Should they be going somewhere While we sort through these and other

questions each side seems genuinely to appreciate knowing the otherrsquos the-

ology better Similarly both sides want warmer personal connections or our

communities Both sense that the past offers a host o examples o what not

to do At the same time no one is interested in doctrinal compromise No

one seems even remotely interested in conversion to the other perspective

For now most seem content in a rather rich middle groundmdashwersquove accli-

mated to conversations that avoid polemic dismissal on the one hand and

relativizing sof-headedness on the other Neither side can legitimately speak

or its community in an official waymdashbecause the Mormon scholars have

no general ecclesiastical authority and because the evangelicals recognize

nonemdashso we joke that nothing we say matters much anyway

Our conversations exist as academic exercises at the core but wersquove ound

our religious lives intruding at almost every turn Te dialogue clearly in-

tersects with my intellectual interests but it has also provided some memo-

rable moments or my LDS soul I crave candor and openness and this

particular group not only tolerates my spirited accounts o Mormonismrsquos

distinctive richness but also patiently tries to assimilate our Mormon variety

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 29: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 2931

What Drew Me to Dialogue and Why Irsquom Still alking 10486271048625

o inconclusiveness on various theological points Our LDS group repre-

sents a cross-section o Mormon intellectual lie afer all rom ldquoneo-

orthodoxrdquo religion proessors firmly committed to the Book o Mormonrsquossoteriology o Christrsquos graceul justification to historians and philosophers

who are equally at home with Joseph Smithrsquos more radical utterances relating

to anthropomorphic gods and infinite humans Especially given the ldquogotchardquo

style o ldquocountercultrdquo approaches to Mormonism I am prooundly grateul

or evangelical partners who are less interested in marking every Mormon

slip-up or idiosyncrasy than they are in truly comprehending what makes a

Latter-day Saint ldquotickrdquo religiously Tey compliment us by actually hearingus LDS apostle Boyd K Packer noted years ago that over time hersquos cared less

about being agreed with and more about being understood1 For me the

dialogue has provided just that understanding And along the way wersquove

orged rather tight bonds o love and trust around such a worthy goal Wersquove

all ound it much more difficult to dismiss or deride a theology when it is

embodied Perhaps some o our evangelical counterparts are even less con-

vinced wersquore real Christians but I doubt it I am sure o this I would be

perectly comortable with Richard Mouw or Craig Blomberg or Dennis

Okholm answering questions about Mormonism in the press or in print I

would expect them to be clear about positions they disagree withmdashheaven

knows theyrsquove been clear with usmdashbut I know that my name or my aith is

sae in their hands Te dialogue has been demanding and it has orced some

tough questions but or the most part I have been moved by the displays o

generosity and humility on both sides

Early on as a graduate student I noticed that one could pay a heavy price

or identiying as a person o aith Not everyone reacted negatively but my

LDS aith cost me more than one riendship at my secular university

Probably partly as a result I developed multiple modes o discourse

Mormon ldquotalkrdquo with my LDS ward members academic talk with history

colleagues Mormon studies talk with LDS academics and so on Te LDS-

evangelical dialogue has proved wonderully destabilizing or that pattern

o compartmentalization In the dialogue all the talk comes together in a

rather raucous commingling o religious and academic discourse It was

jarring at first but Irsquove come to value it as a site o real personal synthesis

where my academic instincts and my religious sensibilities are both firing at

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 30: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3031

10486271048626 983137983148983147983145983150983143 D983151983139983156983154983145983150983141

ull tilt Perhaps both are always at work in me but the juxtaposition is cer-

tainly more explicit in the dialogue When in one instant I quote the Book

o Mormon to underscore contemporary LDS Christocentrism my aca-demic training then prompts a rehearsal o the nineteenth-century LDS

sermonic tradition that checked and sometimes seemed to ignore those

texts And when I discourse on the robustness o Progressive-era Mormon

theologizing Irsquom in the next moment sharing how the New estament has

figured in my personal devotional lie Te university that employs me is

sel-consciously dedicated to the lie o the mind and spirit and Irsquom struck

by the ways the dialogue orces a kind o correlating education in me oneshaped ldquoby study and also by aithrdquo as an early LDS revelation had it 2

I the early question animating the dialogue was are Mormons

Christianmdashand I think there is evidence that such was the casemdashI suspect

the question now has become Can Mormons and evangelicals live up to

their highest ideals preserving their distinctive witnesses while compre-

hending the other more charitably From what I have seen the answer is yes

No evangelical in our group has backed away rom his or her witness to the

truth as they understand it But with that each has offered riendship and

understanding to us who have elt very much targeted in other contexts For

my part not only am I more deeply Mormon because o our conversations

but I suspect Irsquom a better Mormon too in the sense that I can offer love and

generosity without reservation to those I once deemed ldquoenemyrdquo Surely the

God o reconciliation must approve

Copyrighted Material wwwivpresscompermissions

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131

Page 31: Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J. Mouw and Robert L. Millet - EXCERPT

8202019 Talking Doctrine Edited by Richard J Mouw and Robert L Millet - EXCERPT

httpslidepdfcomreaderfulltalking-doctrine-edited-by-richard-j-mouw-and-robert-l-millet-excerpt 3131