talking doctrine edited by richard j. mouw and robert l. millet - excerpt
TRANSCRIPT
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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
8202019 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