The VICARIOUS Atonement

This is Andy Thomas from the Masculine Journey Podcast, where we discover what it means to be a wholehearted man. Your chosen Truth Network podcast is starting in just seconds. Enjoy it, share it, but most of all, thank you for listening and for choosing the Truth Podcast Network. This is the Truth Network. Um You're entering.

Outer brightness How can you look upon this ender with such love? Grace overflows my cove. All of my soul and my heart have been revived in you. I'm satisfied. Welcome, Fireflies.

This week we are talking to Michael Flournoy about an article that he wrote. His article is called The Vicarious Atonement. A proclamation to Latter-day Saints.

So, Michael, why don't you tell us about the thought process that led you to write this article?

Okay.

So, I noticed that a lot of times, you know, and this is talking about from my point of view as a Latter-day Saint back in the day, and then also now on the other side of the, you know, the other team. I played for both teams, and what I've really seen is. that even drunkless tend to use really pointed. Aggressive argumentation against Latter-day Saints. And what happens right away is there's a wall that gets put up.

And so either the Latter-day Saint disengages right away, you know, writes you off as an anti-Mormon, they don't want to talk to you at all ever again, or it's a fight, a brutal die on this hill fight over every principle. And I was trying to think maybe there's a way to go about it a little bit differently. And this article, The Vicarious Atonement, is really based on what God did to pull me out of Mormonism.

So I kind of took that same approach where I'm going to teach a principle, a true principle, and they can do with it what they want to do.

So it's all about imputed righteousness.

So the goal was that I'm going to take the force of their own testimony. And I'm going to use that against them.

So, a Latter-day Saint will often say, I believe the Book of Mormon is true. And I've had LDS missionaries come to my house and they'll say, If you pray about the Book of Mormon and you find that it's true, will you be baptized? And I've started to kind of turn that around on them. And I'll say, Did you know that the Book of Mormon teaches imputed righteousness? And usually they'll say that they don't know what that is.

So I'll explain it to them. I'll explain why it's a problem for a believing Latter-day Saint, and then I'll turn the challenge around on them. And I'll say, if you find that the Book of Mormon teaches imputed righteousness, will you leave the church? And so, what happens is their testimony of the Book of Mormon becomes a problem. If the book of Mormon is teaching against Church doctor.

And so you put them in a catch-22. And so that's what I'm trying to do with this article: I use a lot of Book of Mormon passages, and I use them the way that he. Mormon missionary does.

So, Mormon missionary will first use Bible passages, and you guys remember this, I'm sure. And then, once they do that, they will use a Book of Mormon passage right afterwards to kind of seal the deal. And so, I'm using that same approach where I will use Book of Mormon passages to prove my point, and then I will follow it up with a Bible passage right afterwards. And so It's just a little bit of a different approach for Latter-day Saints. And I've had a lot of good feedback from the LDS who have read it.

None of them have gotten offended. It's opened doors for a conversation. And so it's been really interesting. Can I ask you a quick follow-up to that? Yeah.

Now, what if in showing them both Bible passages and Book of Mormon passages, you show them that the difference between amputated righteousness and imputated. And I say, great, the Bible says it, the Book of Mormon says it too.

So I'll believe it, you know. But then they're like, well, since the Book of Mormon says it, that means it's true.

So what if they use that as kind of fodder to say, Well, maybe that's not what my church teaches, but since scripture teaches it, I'll believe it. And then they don't have any incentive to want to leave the LDS church. How would you address that concern? Yeah.

Honestly, initially, I wouldn't be too upset about it because they've come to believe in imputed righteousness, which means that they've come closer to the true gospel. What happened to me is that exact same thing you just talked about is what happened to me initially when I learned about imputed righteousness because I learned about it in the Bible, in the Book of Mormon first. And I said, okay, this is fantastic. It's just like they've always taught me in church. These two books bear witness of each other.

So of course they're going to share the same message. But what happens the second you embrace That doctrine every single time you're in general conference. And they teach a works-based gospel. You can't ignore it. It weighs really heavy on your shelf over time.

And I don't believe that it is actually sustainable in the long run for a Latter-day Saint to believe that doctrine. I think it's the most anti-Mormon doctrine that exists on the planet. That and the Trinity, you know, it'd be like a Mormon accepting the Trinity because it teaches it in the Book of Mormon. And it's just far and away against what the church teaches. And so, the longer you keep going to the church and you hear your so-called prophets and apostles teaching against what you know to be true, then they're going to lose credibility.

Over the long run. Yeah, I like your approach with this article, especially because. You open with, and I don't want to get too much into it because we'll cover your introduction, but you open with kind of an olive branch, I would say, to Latter-day Saints in terms of kind of helping them understand the catch-22 that you found yourself in, but also. Uh, kind of reaching out to them, like you were saying, you know, that a lot of times dialogue between uh Christians and Latter-day Saints can be very, very uh pointed and just a fight, you know, and uh, I just like the way you introduce the article.

So, what the audience is Latter-day Saints for this article. Correct. What do you hope that Latter-day Saints take away from this article?

Well, I hope that they come away. With a couple of thoughts. One, that ex-Mormons aren't out to get them, that we're not hateful, but especially that there is that the vicarious atonement is true, that they don't have to believe in a gospel of amputation, that righteousness is actually imputed to our accounts.

So I want them to accept this principle.

So, this article is not aimed at in the short term, like making them. Doubt their church or have a faith crisis or anything like that. It's just to teach them something, and it is using. Of Mormonese, you know, their own theological language to help them understand it using the temple and using the Book of Mormon, so their own scripture, their own practices. And I think I did a pretty good job of that.

One thing I want to do this episode is kind of translate some of the things I say into. English into Evangelical language because it's written to Mormons, and so some of it's not going to make sense on the surface. And so, I'll, as I read it, you know, I'll talk about what it. means and what I'm saying exactly.

Okay, so so when you get to that part, then you'll put evangelicals at ease that you can still sin all you want. This article is metaphysical. Yeah, well, and I was gonna say too that I've had some evangelicals kind of and Latter-day Saints, especially Latter-day Saints, kind of come back at me with what about obedience? And I didn't really cover that in this article. I think I'm gonna.

Probably write another one in the near future that covers that. But I wanted to really just talk about salvation and how that is obtained through faith alone first. Because I think you've got to understand that before being obedient. Is going to make sense, yeah, yeah, for sure. All right, so why don't we get into uh reading the first section of your article?

You want to want to work through the introduction, Michael? Yes, so I started with 2 Corinthians 5:21, and this is all going to be in King James Version, just because that is what Latter-day Saints use. For He hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. Have you ever talked with evangelicals and become the victim of aggressive preaching? Perhaps they went so far as to attack your faith and regurgitated a hundred reasons why you aren't a Christian.

You may have been accused of worshiping Joseph Smith and participating in a cult. I've been in that situation a hundred times as an LDS missionary and later while defending the faith online. I'm familiar with the bad taste it leaves in your mouth and the knot that forms in the stomach. You're left knowing nothing of evangelical beliefs, except they don't seem to like Mormons very much. In 2015, I began a serious study on the topic of grace.

I had no idea what I was getting myself into. Within a year, my conviction shifted and I found myself embracing the evangelical position. I came to realize there are two kinds of gospels. One gospel teaches that we must cut all the sin out of our lives to become worthy. The other is about putting something on, namely the righteousness of Christ.

This gospel says that we can be saved despite our sins. I discovered this second gospel, which I call the gospel of imputation, all over the Book of Mormon. The Bible also testified of its truthfulness. In this article, I'll be explaining the evangelical position using LDS scripture and language. As an added bonus, I'll avoid the usual accusations and name-calling.

The main difference in our soteriology is that evangelicals believe in only one temple. This temple only needed to be used once, and it transferred all the saving ordinances to everyone who believes in Christ. That temple was the cross. All right. Yeah.

So when I read your article, Michael, I keyed in on the really important stuff. I really like your correct use of the indefinite article and before the acronym LDS. It's that kind of thing that really gets my editor's juices flowing, and I can put down my red pen and really start just reading and understanding and. Taking in what the article says. And I hope that the introduction that you've worked up here will help a Latter-day Saint to put their sword down.

And just read and listen to what you're saying because you've been there. You understand their frustrations in the typical LDS and Christian dialogue that goes on. And so I hope that this introduction allows them to put down their sword like it allowed me to put down my red pen. Matthew, thoughts on the introduction? Yeah, I agree.

I agree with Paul. I think he did a great job really kind of trying to break down those barriers. Between evangelicals and Latter-day Saints. I had a thought too. While you're trying to build bridges to Latter-day Saints, I think you're not watering down what you're trying to say either, because you didn't say, oh, it's just a slightly different view of the gospel.

You plainly stated that it's a second gospel.

So, could you explain that a little bit more? Why you said it was a second gospel and not just a different view of the gospel? Yeah.

So I didn't. Name both of the gospels in the introduction. I would kind of get into that a little bit later, but basically, the two gospels are the gospel of amputation. You know, I have to cut all the sin from my life in order to become worthy. The other one is the gospel of imputation.

I accept Christ's righteousness and I put it on. I do not have to amputate all of the sin to become worthy. And so these are polar opposites. There's no way for both of these to be true. And really, The gospel of imputation, it completely invalidates us, you know, saving ordinances, a priesthood, and an organized church of priesthood holders, of bishops, and apostles and prophets.

You don't need those things, you just need to be able to acquire that righteousness. From Christ.

So you're making it clear to Latter-day Saints that you're trying to say that you understand their position. You're trying to speak to their position and from their position, but at the same time, you're trying to say this is not the same gospel that Latter-day Saints believe. And you want to explain why? Yes. And I'll get into that a little bit more, but.

Mostly I'm just trying to say, hey guys, my sword's not out. You know, it is sheathed on my side. Like, let's talk. And that is the reaction that I've gotten from all the Latter-day Saints who have read it so far. None of them have gotten upset, argued with me.

I've mostly just had discussions from it. I've actually had more. Christians on our side get upset at me than Latter-day Saints.

So it's kind of interesting. And some of that is because I'm using Mormonese. And even in this section, there's a couple of things that I had people. Kind of question me about. And one of those is that I said that we believe in only one temple.

And so I've had people ask me, like, well, what about Solomon's temple, right? What about that one? And so I'm like, well, I'm talking about. functioning Temples, something that's actually being used right now. And I'm talking about temples in the LES sense, a place where a vicarious ordinance.

Takes place.

So, yeah, technically, I guess that would be incorrect in Christian language, but in Mormonese, It's correct. That is the difference. We believe in one temple, and that is the cross. The cross does the same thing as what their temples do. And I'll get into that in the next sections.

Yeah.

Yeah, I like it. And although you didn't name the two gospels in the introduction, I do remember the first time I saw you online kind of put the idea out there of juxtaposing these two gospels, the gospel of amputation and the gospel of imputation. And it's another thing that got my editor brain abuzz, right? Because I was like, man, the alliteration on that is amazing. It's great.

And it really drives home the point.

So really well done with your writing on this one, Michael, and look forward to hearing the next few sections. All right. Well, I'll go ahead and get into the next section here. This one is on the gospel of amputation. Growing up as a seventh generation Latter-day Saint, I believed I needed to keep the commandments perfectly.

If I sinned, I needed to repent and stop doing them. In essence, I needed to amputate the sinful. Behavior from my life. After all, Jesus commanded us to be perfect in Matthew 5:48. I knew no unclean thing could enter God's kingdom, per 3rd Nephi 27:19.

In fact, the Book of Mormon stated that God could not save us in our sins. 1137. Nor could he look upon sin with allowance, Alma 45:16. That meant if I went to judgment day with sin, I would be cast out. Even my sins of omission had to stop.

2 Nephi 25, 23 said we were saved by grace after all we could do. Moroni 10:32 said, Grace was sufficient after we denied ourselves of all ungodliness. James 2:10 says, For whosoever shall keep the whole law and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. The book of Mormon made it clear that God wouldn't be impressed if my spiritual report card was a B plus. James 2.10 said that a score of B plus was impossible.

If I had one red mark, my score would become an F. Unfortunately for me, God was a holy being and I was anything but that. In Matthew 5.18, Jesus said that until heaven and earth passed, not one jot or tittle of the law would pass. In other words, it was unacceptable to break even one iota of God's law. That wouldn't have been a problem if God's laws were easy, but they weren't.

In Matthew 5, Jesus said, if we looked upon a woman to lust after her, we committed adultery in our hearts, Matthew 5, 28. And if we called our brothers fools, we'd be in danger of hellfire, Matthew 5, 22. In his sermon, In Alma 5, 28, 19, Alma says, Behold, are ye stripped of pride? I say unto you: if ye are not, ye are not prepared to meet God. Behold, ye must prepare quickly, for the kingdom of heaven is soon at hand, and such an one hath not eternal life.

Behold, I say, is there one among you who is not stripped of envy? I say unto you that such an one is not prepared, and I would that he should prepare quickly, for the hour is close at hand, and he knoweth not when the time shall come, for such an one is not found guiltless. Despite the strictness of God's commands, I gained comfort in the idea of enabling grace as defined in the Bible dictionary. It was a power God gave his disciples so they could accomplish impossible feats.

However, As time dragged on, I found myself falling short again and again. I would repent of my sins, only to find myself trapped in them again or trespassing against God in new ways. This led me into greater despair and guilt than I originally felt. Doctrine and Covenants 82:7 says, And now, verily I say unto you, I, the Lord, will not lay any sin to your charge. Go your ways and sin no more, but unto that soul who sinneth shall the former sins return, saith the Lord your God.

No matter how hard I tried or how desperately I prayed for God's enabling grace, I couldn't approach God's standard. It felt like the odds were stacked against me, like I'd been given an impossible gospel to carry out. Of course, I believed I'd get a second chance at repenting in the next life, but that didn't carry much hope. I'd always been taught it was harder to repent in spirit prison. If I couldn't reach perfection here, how could I do it there?

It was no wonder Romans 3:10. Said there were none righteous, and 1 John 1:8 said, If we said we deceived ourselves, if we claimed we had no sin, that left me in a pitiable position since, according to the Bible, the wages of sin was death. Romans 6:23. If you find yourself in a similar position, take heart. The message of the vicarious atonement is for you.

Yeah.

Yeah, really good. You know, in this section, you do a really good job of kind of describing the utter hopelessness that one can feel as a Latter-day Saint trying to, you know, do all things whatsoever the Lord God shall command, right? That's the test that Latter-day Saints are put to. And it really does become something that ultimately ends in despair. And, you know, when I was reading through.

your article again in preparation for tonight, especially with your quote. From Elm 5, I was reminded of a journal article or a journal post that I wrote. Back when I first started to question, back when I first kind of encountered some questions about the Latter-day Saint faith that were challenging me online. And I did this whole analogy about a tree that sprung up from the pride in my heart. And I was really tearing myself up in my journal about pride, right?

Because at that time, I felt like what, you know, if you're doubting, there's something wrong with you, you're sinning in some way. And so for me, it was the pride, you know, and that's what I was making an analogy to.

So, yeah, really, really good job in this section of describing what that's like as a Latter-day Saint to just trying to live up to that perfect standard and realizing that you never can. You're listening to Outer Brightness, a podcast for post-Mormons who are drawn by God to walk with Jesus rather than turn away. Outer brightness, outer brightness, outer brightness, outer brightness. There's no weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth here, except when Michael's hanger that is, hangry that is, hangry that is. We were all born and raised in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, more commonly referred to as the Mormon faith.

All of us have left that religion and have been drawn to faith in Jesus Christ based on biblical teachings. The name of our podcast, Outer Brightness, reflects John 1.9, which calls Jesus the true light which gives light to everyone. We have found life beyond Mormonism to be brighter than we were told it would be, and the light we have is not our own. It comes to us from without, thus, Outer Brightness. Our purpose is to share our journeys of faith and what God has done in drawing us to His Son.

We have conversations about all aspects of that transition, the fears, challenges, joys, and everything in between. We're glad you found us, and we hope you'll stick around. After reading this section, I have a question for you, Michael. And it's a question that a Latter-day Saint, I think, might put to you, right? Because in the Book of Mormon, there are also scriptures like 1 Nephi 3:7.

Right, that the Lord Lord will not command anything w uh that he will not provide a way for for you to To do that which he commands, right?

So, did those passages give you hope? Why or why not? You mean when I was a Latter-day Saint? Yes. It would give me temporary hope.

Yes. Because I would believe, you know what, God is going to open a way. The whole idea of enabled righteousness to me is very similar to, it's kind of like going to a boss and complaining about things at work or your pay or something. And they're like, well, you know, just hold on for six more months and then things are going to be better. It's like this carrot that's just being dangled in front of you.

And for a while, it works. But then eventually, when you're practicing this and you're hoping for that enabled righteousness and it's not coming and that way is not being opened up to be completely obedient to the commandments. It actually Gives you more hopelessness than hope.

So, yeah, it's more hope for a little while, but then you kind of crash eventually. Yeah, I was reviewing the video that we did for the Book of Mormon Central video because I uploaded it this week. And yeah, there's a point where I forget which one it was, which seminary teacher it was, but he kind of says exactly what you said, Michael.

Now he says there's going to be times where it's hard. where you're going to feel hopeless. And he didn't really provide much comfort, you know. He basically said, Well, I mean. That's how it goes, you know?

Like we're, it may seem like we're going around in circles, but that's how it's supposed to be. But your circles should be going upward. And I'm like, wow, that's real comforting.

So I think it's exactly what you said. And I think, yeah, I agree with Paul that. He really kind of Just in those brief paragraphs, you really just divulge what it's like to be a Latter-day Saint and feel the yoke of bondage, you know, a phrase used in the Book of Mormon a lot. That's what I felt like, the commandments where it was a yoke. Yeah.

And I think one of the big things that a lot of LDS apologists would probably throw back at me right now is lately I'm seeing them a lot online saying, like, oh, yeah, it's just faith is all we need. Jesus is all we need. You know, you ex-Mormons are always, you know, acting like. we have this giant list Of things that we need to do in order to be worthy. And so they will sweep all of that under the rug when they're talking to outsiders, but it is true.

That, you know, I said the Book of Mormon teaches imputation, but it actually teaches both. It actually teaches both gospels. I don't think that the Book of Mormon is consistent by any means, but you look at those passages that I cite in Alma, and it's very clearly teaching the gospel of amputation. It says, are you stripped of pride? If you are not, you are not worthy, you are not ready to enter heaven, you do not have eternal life.

And that's the same thing as saying, have you amputated pride? It is the exact same thing. You have to amputate all your pride and all your envy. And that's not me, an ex-Mormon, talking. That is the book of Alma in the Book of Mormon saying that.

Yeah.

Staying on that topic of the gospel of amputation, how would you respond to a Latter-day Saint who said that Jesus himself preached the gospel of amputation in, say, Matthew 5:29 to 30? And I would read that so that our listeners will know what I'm talking about. Give me just a second.

So, Matthew 5:29 to 30, you quoted 5:28 in your article. 29 says, If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you, for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish than for your whole body to be cast into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, Cut it off and cast it from you, for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish than for your whole body to be cast into hell. Really, really glad you asked that question, Paul. I've actually had Latter-day Saints tell me that the Bible teaches.

The gospel of amputation. And when they do that, the first reaction that I have is: I'm actually glad that they acknowledge that there are these two different gospels and that they believe in the gospel of amputation. And now they're trying to defend it.

So I consider it a very honest approach.

So I like it when Latter-day Saints do this.

So my response is that. They're correct in the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus is teaching. The gospel of amputation, but there's a reason. That he's doing it.

And I'm going to get into this a little bit in my article, but it's because when it comes to preaching, the gospel of amputation is really useful. In any equation, and I'm going to get in this in my article. There is a problem and there is a solution. And you cannot get to the solution without the problem. And so, when it comes to our salvation, The gospel of amputation is the problem that leads us to the answer.

Of impeded righteousness. And so here. He is talking about how strict God's law is, and he does it over and over again. If you even look at a woman to lust after her, you've committed adultery. If you call your brother a fool, you are in danger of hellfire.

You know, if someone slaps you, you got to turn the other cheek, you got to love your enemies. He goes on and on and on. Like, this is no. Joke, God's standards, He says, you know, not one jot or one tittle will, you know, if you break one of the least of these commandments, you will be called least. In the kingdom of heaven.

And so God's standard is perfection, and he is showing us that. And the same thing happens when the rich young ruler goes to Christ and says, I've kept all the commandments my whole life. And then Jesus says, Go and sell all that you have and follow me, and you will have treasure in heaven. And he can't do it.

So basically, Jesus uses the gospel of amputation on the rich young ruler, saying, Well, here's the standard. And that's the thing. I think a lot of Latter-day Saints think that they're capable of keeping the commandments. And if you think that, then I would say that you probably don't have a good grasp of God's law or his standard. Because if you did, then you would be like the young rich ruler.

Who is sorrowing and realizing that this is not an attainable goal? Right. And in that case in Matthew 19, you know, the Latter-day Saint I spoke to earlier, who used that passage. He said, well, Jesus said to go sell all your property. You know, that's what you need to do.

And I said, okay, well, Why haven't you done it? You know, if Jesus is saying this is how you have eternal life, is by selling all your property and following him, why haven't you done it? You know, Jesus wasn't trying to say, oh, this is actually how you're going to be saved. He was basically showing him the sinfulness of his heart. He didn't want to give that up.

Jesus knew he didn't want to give that up because that was his God. That was his idol. Where's his possessions? And so, yeah, and then because the apostles, they're like, well, this guy, he's been keeping all the commandments. You know, is there any hope for us?

And Jesus says, What is impossible with man is possible with God.

So, yeah, I think you're absolutely right that Jesus was kind of, he was showing them the weight. and the exact you know the exact requirements of the law in every single point. That if you're going to say, I want to be justified by law.

Well, be careful because you've got to keep all of it, every single part of it. Yeah.

And what's great about the story with the young rich ruler is, you know, he talks about what the commandments are. You know, you must love, you love God with all your heart and all your soul. And he's like, I do that. It's like, oh, really?

Okay.

Well, then sell all that you have and follow me.

So basically, get rid of that and choose me instead. And it becomes very clear that he did not love God with all of his heart because it would have been easy to do that if he did.

So. Yep, absolutely. All right, good.

So let's go on to the next section of your article.

Okay.

This section is called The Law, Our Schoolmaster. Evangelicals used to tell me God gave the Israelites the law of Moses to show them they couldn't keep it. That statement is antithetical to everything Latter-day Saints believe. Why would a loving heavenly father give us commandments we can't keep? To answer that question.

Let me point to a simple equation. One plus one equals two. This equation has two parts, the problem and the solution. You can't find the answer without the problem. And when it comes to salvation, the problem is the law.

The more we try to amputate sin from our lives, the more aware we become of our enslavement to it. The New Testament teaches that the law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, Galatians 3, 24. As a Latter-day Saint, I thought that meant I became righteous by obeying God's laws.

However, the opposite is true. The law doesn't make us righteous, it exists to condemn us. Galatians 3:21 through 24 says, Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid, for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. This is a shocking revelation. Paul says that righteousness doesn't come by keeping the law. In fact, No law can be enacted that generates it.

In verse 22, he says, It's because we're sinners that we can receive faith. In other words, we have to be beaten down and pinned against the wall before we realize we can't do it ourselves. Faith is realizing we have nothing to offer. We acknowledge we have received the due wages of our sin, and only Jesus can bring us to life. In Colossians 2:13, Paul says, We were dead in our sins.

As a Latter-day Saint, you are especially equipped to understand the implications of this because it coincides with your doctrine about temples. A vicarious ordinance can only be performed for a dead person. Once the ordinance is done, the dead person merely has to accept what has been done on their behalf. This is called imputation. In other words, your act of righteousness, i.e., getting baptized, endowed, or sealed, is accredited to the dead as if they did it themselves.

But wait, there's more. In LDS theology, there's never talk of the dead having to repent if they break the covenants associated with ordinances. In fact, Amma 42:13 says repentance can only occur in mortality. It logically follows that the dead don't accept a covenant that can condemn them. But a covenant.

That acts as though it's been kept perfectly. This is essentially what Jesus did for us. He lived a perfect life of obedience to the Father, and on the cross He traded His righteousness for our sin. This is why Romans 5.10 associates salvation not only with Christ's death, but with his life. Since he was obedient, we are endowed with a perfect righteousness.

It is as if we obeyed every commandment God ever gave. Yeah, yeah, really good section. When did you first make the connection between the vicarious work for the dead that Latter-day Saints do in their temples and imputed righteousness? It was during my faith struggle. And then, you know, I was studying the impossible gospel argument and I was just trying to find an answer to it.

And I was like, God, give me something. I was praying to God and like, help me figure out how to beat this. You know, how do I beat the problem of. Of amputation, and the solution was revealed to me, which was impeded righteousness. And of course, I found it in the Book of Mormon and the Bible first.

And once I found it in those two places, I noticed that it was the central theme. Of the temple. I mean, that's the whole thing that you do in the temples. when you do work for the dad, because they can't do it themselves. And so they need somebody to do it on their behalf.

And I was like, It was just a huge epiphany where I thought this is incredible. And of course, it bolstered my testimony at first. Like I was saying earlier, it could happen with a Latter-day Saint.

So I was like, okay, that's the Bible, that's the Book of Mormon, and it's the temple all teaching this principle now.

So it really locked me in. And it wasn't until I kind of came to some more realizations, and I'll get to them later in the article, where I discovered that if Christ's righteousness is imputed to us at belief, then I do not need the LAS Church. Or the temple ordinances, or anything else for that matter.

So it's definitely a double-edged sword. Yeah.

Yeah.

I had a similar, well, maybe not similar, but a related realization when I was still a Latter-day Saint. excuse me gone to our state president to have the second Part of a temple recommend interview. When you're a Latter-day Saint, you have a temple recommend interview first with your bishop of your ward and then with your stake president. And then once you've got both of their approvals, then you can get a temple recommend. And I was going for a renewal of my temple recommend and met with the stake president, and we were talking about some questions that I had that had come up through online discussions.

And he was sharing with me some things and thoughts he had about the temple and what we do there. And he was really animated about a realization that he said he had had about how when we do vicarious work in the temples. when Latter-day Saints do vicarious work in the temples, they become saviors on Mount Zion. To the people for whom they are doing the ordinances. And at first, I was really jazzed about that idea.

I remember talking to Angela about it on our drive home from the Stake Center. We were crossing the bridge from Kentucky into Cincinnati to get around to where we lived in another part of Kentucky. We would cross through downtown, but I remember being really jazzed about it and thinking, man, how cool is that? We become saviors on Mount Zion. Right.

And then, I don't know, a few days later, the thought hit me: I'm not worthy to be any kind of savior to anyone. And that thought really ate at me because I realized, wow, how could I ever replace what Jesus did? And so, yeah, related thought that I had. That's a really good thought. And I forgot about the phrasing saviors on Mount Zion, but it's a really common thing that.

Latter-day Saints say about those who do ordinances for the dead. And the problem with it is that you have no right to, first of all, compare yourself to the savior because what you're doing is a completely different class of what he does. Because in Mormonism, all he really did was pave the path and then he gives you the enabling power to walk that path yourself. But in the temple, you are doing the vicarious ordinance for the person. All they have to do is say yes, and they make it all the way to the other end of the path.

And so it's not the same thing. In fact, it's kind of blasphemous because you're saying that you are actually. More effective at saving the dead, at saving these people than Christ is. You know, you're more efficient than him. Yeah.

Isn't that kind of interesting? Like the people that Jesus couldn't save, it's up to us to save them, in a sense. It's pretty. pretty wild. Yeah, it's all a team effort.

Well, I I thought about this too because on my mission, you know, we were very limited in what we could watch or listen to.

So You know, on P Days a lot of times we'd watch the seminary videos.

So that's kind of why I was re-watching them on YouTube because it's kind of nostalgic. And one of them, I think, was about the temple. And it ends with a quote from President Hinckley, where he says: basically, in essence, he knows of no other work that approaches that of the work of the Savior. Than temple worship. And that really, like in my mission, that really hit me.

It's like, wow, you know, that'd be really awesome to be a temple worker because, yeah, we get to help people, you know. I didn't see it as becoming a savior. I saw it as like helping people that couldn't help themselves, you know, kind of like being Christ-like, you know, in imitating Christ. A lot of times we're supposed to help the needy and the poor, you know, and extend the hand of, you know, that. as if Christ himself were helping them.

Yeah, in retrospect, it does seem like, wow, you know, especially when you understand the book of Hebrews and understand that the priesthood of Melchizedek that we talked about in a previous episode, that's for Christ only. He's the only one that can. Hold that priesthood. And so to take that priesthood on ourselves and claim that we can do the work that Jesus did is pretty blasphemous when you think about it. Yeah, it is.

I mean, it's taking it to a whole other level, not just saying that righteousness comes by some law or some system. But then it's also saying we can actually sort of Pass out that righteousness on our own.

So it's a whole new level of insanity. I suspect that maybe this is an area, this comparison of imputation. Of righteousness to the Latter-day Saint temple ordinances? Is this an area that some Christians have criticized you for on this article, Michael? Actually, no.

Surprisingly, this is not a place where they've criticized me. Um, it's, I think it's a really good comparison because I'll often bring up imputed righteousness to Latter-day Saints. I'll say, Have you ever heard of imputed righteousness? And they'll usually say no. And I'll say, Well, believe it or not, you actually believe in it.

This is what happens in your temples.

So, when you'll go right into the temple and I'll say, When you do these ordinances for the dead, and then they accept it, and it's credited to them as if they had done it, that's imputation. And then they're like, oh, wow, that's really cool. I just didn't know what that word was. And then I'll go into the Vicarious Atonement. I mean, it is a direct comparison as far as what we believe.

So it's just a really easy. I guess conversation starter and And it flows really well into the rest of the conversation.

So I use it all the time and actually. Come to think of it, one of the Christians that helped me in my conversion was Keith Walker. And when I met with him for the first time, he had a shirt on that said, Jesus was my proxy. And so that might have been what kind of got the wheels turning in my head: like, oh, that's pretty cool, you know, using an LDS word. And it totally fits because he is our proxy.

Shall I go on to the next section? Yes, please do. All right. This one is called Nephi's Courage. After leaving Jerusalem, Lehi and his family come to a valley with a river running into the ocean.

He says to his son Lemuel, Oh, that thou mightest be like unto this river, continually running into the fountain of all righteousness. That's 1 Nephi 2:9. The fountain of all righteousness is God, He is the source. The imagery of a river flowing endlessly into the sea is symbolic of what Christ does for us. Even though we continue to sin, his righteousness flows into us, drowning out our wickedness.

When Jesus spoke to the woman at the well, he said, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again, but whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst. But the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. John 4, 13 through 14. If we're trying to drink from the well of human righteousness, that well will run dry.

However, Christ's righteousness is infinite and never ceases to quench our parched souls. In Philippians 3, 8 through 9, Paul says, Yea, doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ. And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ. The righteousness which is of God by faith. Here he claims.

That the righteousness he has is not his own, but that it comes from Christ.

Furthermore, he obtained righteousness through faith. This idea is echoed in Enos. After praying to God, the Lord tells Enos his sins are forgiven. Bewildered, Enos asks how it is done. The Lord answers in Enos 1:8.

And he said unto me, Because of thy faith in Christ, whom thou hast never before heard nor seen. And many years pass away before he shall manifest himself in the flesh. Wherefore go to. Thy faith hath made thee whole. Enos wasn't justified because of ordinances or obedience to commandments.

If he were, he wouldn't have been surprised when he was forgiven. When we work to become righteous, forgiveness becomes a wage instead of a gift. In this instance, it was faith alone that made Enos whole. All he had to do to receive the vicarious atonement was believe in Christ. This idea of imputed righteousness is heavily emphasized in 2 Nephi chapter 2.

Verse 3 says we are redeemed because of the righteousness of our Redeemer. Verse 4 says salvation is free. And verse 8 says, There is no flesh that can dwell in the presence of God save it be through the merits and mercy and grace of the holy Messiah. Perhaps the greatest metaphor ever written about imputation comes from 1 Nephi chapters 3 and 4. It tells a story of Nephi and his brothers going to Jerusalem to get a set of brass plates from a powerful man named Laban.

Their initial attempts meet with failure because Laban is unwilling to part with his treasure. Nephi's family comes back with their riches, intent on purchasing the plates. Laban takes their money but drives them out of his presence. Just when things look hopeless, an angel appears saying, Laban will be delivered into their hands. Nephi creeps into the city and finds Laban passed out drunk in the street.

At the urging of the spirit, Nephi takes Laban's sword and decapitates him. He then puts on Laban's clothing and equipment and makes his way to the treasury. Once he's inside, he is mistaken for Laban and given the brass plates. In this metaphorical story, The breast plates represent salvation, and Laban represents Christ. When they offer their riches to purchase the plates, they are driven off.

Such will be the case if we try to offer God our obedience as a currency to enter heaven. But then the story takes a turn. Nephi slays Laban and puts on his clothes. This symbolizes putting on Christ's righteousness. Suddenly, we are no longer judged as impostors trying to break into heaven, but as if we were Christ Himself.

The Book of Mormon calls this putting on the robes of righteousness. You can see 2 Nephi 9:14 for that. Laban even has to die in order for this to take place. The parallels are really astounding. In one of the more heartfelt monologues in the Book of Mormon, Nephi confesses that he is easily beset by sin and tells us what it is that gives him courage in the face of his human frailty.

2 Nephi 4:17 through 19 says, Nevertheless, notwithstanding the great goodness of the Lord in showing me his great and marvelous works, my heart exclaimeth, O wretched man that I am! Yea, my heart sorroweth because of my flesh. My soul grieveth because of mine iniquities. I am encompassed about because of the temptations and the sins which do so easily beset me. And when I desire to rejoice, my heart groaneth because of my sins.

Nevertheless, I know in whom I have trusted. There is no comfort in the gospel of amputation. It leaves us sorrowing over our wretched state.

However, when we trust in Christ, he overcomes our sins. and becomes our bedrock of courage. Good. Matthew, you have any thoughts on that section? Yeah, there's so there's a lot here to tackle.

So I was kind of gonna start more from the beginning.

So I think that a lot of Latter-day Saints would pretty much agree with a lot of what you're saying at the very beginning of this section. The one thing I could think of, putting myself in the mindset of a Latter-day Saint, is so there's a part where you say, if we're trying to drink from the well of human righteousness, that well will run dry.

However, Christ's righteousness is infinite and never ceases to quench our parched souls. And one book I think a lot of Latter-day Saints really like is The Infinite Atonement. I forget who writes it. Do you remember the author? Isn't it?

It's one of the, I don't know, it's. Is it Robert Millett that writes that one? Could look it up, but I can't remember. It's been too long. I've started, there's starting to be holes in my memory.

But they would say, Yeah, we agree. Amen to that. You know, we're relying on Christ's righteousness, and it's an infinite righteousness. And then when you read Philippians 3:8 through 9, you said here, quote, here he claims that the righteousness he has is not his own, but that it comes from Christ.

Furthermore, he obtained righteousness through faith. And a Latter-day Saint would say here, Amen.

However, Paul. Paul doesn't say that he obtained righteousness through faith alone. It says he obtained righteousness through faith.

So, how would you respond to a Latter-day Saint that might ask about that?

So, I part. Purposely did not get to that point yet. And that's part of my, you know, I guess, Mormon background. You know, I'm trying to bring it out line upon line and precept upon precept.

So to me, it's very important that a Latter-day Saint just sees that. I mean, the only point I'm really trying to get across here is that Christ's righteousness is given to us. And then, here in a little bit, I'm going to go into how that happens at faith. But one thing that I do tell Latter-day Saints a lot, I'll ask them. Um You know, Christ is an infinite being, and so he's infinitely righteous, correct?

And so, can infinity be divided? My math brain is turning on, so you're you can you can have different sets of infinity, but I won't get into that.

So, right, but so so, say he gives us, I don't know. One percent of his righteousness, and he is infinite. How much righteousness do we have? One percent of infinite would still be infinite, I guess. Is that what you're trying to say?

I believe so.

Okay.

Yeah.

So I believe that at the moment when we receive his righteousness, we have. All the righteousness that we need to enter heaven. And be in the Father's presence.

So I've mentioned that to Latter-day Saints before. It's it's made them Stop talking and think for a while, so it's been a really good point every time that I've ever brought it up to a Latter-day Saint.

So it is very effective to use that line of reasoning with them. Yeah, I think that's great. I think it does. Definitely get them thinking outside the box, but still using language that they're familiar with. One book that I really liked as a Latter-day Saint II was Believing Christ by Stephen Robinson, I think.

And I think he got, he kind of like dipped his toes into imputation. But then pulled it out again. And he kind of uses various analogies or parables, like the parable of the bicycle, where a child goes to buy the bicycle, he can't afford it. Only has 45 cents and he realized the bike's $150. And he says, There's no way I can pay for this.

So he gives in his 45 cents and then his dad pays the rest.

So is that the same thing as the gospel of imputed righteousness or gospel of imputation? Is that the same thing you're talking about here, or is that something different? It's still different. And here's why it's different. And I think they've actually updated that story somehow, is what the rumors say on the streets.

But if you have to give Up 45 cents. It is still a gospel of amputation because you've got to do something. first. Actually, I think Brad Wilcox comes a lot closer in his speeches to the gospel of imputation because he says things like: you know, mom pays for the piano lessons. All she expects is for us to practice, and practicing does not help pay for the lessons.

And that is much closer because you know, when you When you accept the gospel of imputation, you still believe in obedience, but that obedience does not go towards your salvation. You know, it is something that you do afterwards. As a fruit of The salvation that you have received. And so I really like. Brad Wilcox's, even though he's LDS, I feel like he's much closer.

To the true gospel, whereas if I'm paying 45 cents to my mom, like that is going towards the piano lessons, not very much, you know, it's not helping a lot, you know, but it is still a sacrifice, it is still.

Something that I am cutting off from my bank account, that 45 cents. And you look at what Christ says. I will have mercy and not sacrifice. but go and learn what that means. And so he's basically saying, I, you know, he's promoting the gospel of imputation.

And saying, I don't want you to follow the gospel of amputation. Yeah, that's really great. Thank you, Michael. And I was going to point out, too. When you talk about putting on the robes of righteousness, the robes of Christ, and the analogy with, or the story with.

Uh Laban. And Nephi, when he went to go get the plates, and he puts on his clothing in order to Pretend that he's him. If you think about it in terms of the robes of righteousness of Christ, it would be like it's not, if we tried to add our works to it, it would be like having the righteousness of Christ, his robe, and having little patches here and there where we slapped on top of it or little pieces of duct tape, you know, to try to say, well, it wasn't quite perfect here, so we gotta slap some duct tape on it. to fill in the holes. But Christ's robe of righteousness is seamless.

It has no seam to it. And so it was the same thing with the story of Laban. He wasn't like, oh, I'm going to fix this part here. You know, he just took the clothes and put them on as is, and that's what he wore. Um, What do you think of that comparison?

You know what's funny? You actually kind of brought this picture to my mind, but it's kind of like going to Judgment Day in the robes of righteousness, in Christ's robes, but then you've got your name tag slapped on top of it. And then it's just like, okay, do you want to be judged as Michael Flournoy or Matthew Eklund, or do you want to be judged based on Christ's merits?

So I'm just saying right now, when I go to Judgment Day, I'm going to make sure I don't have my name tag on. You're not going to wear your missionary. No, I'm not wearing my mission. I don't even know where it is. I lost it, unfortunately.

Oh, man. Yeah, but I'm going to step back a little bit. Really good conversation between the two of you there. Um It's interesting, Matthew, that you brought up believing Christ and the bicycle analogy because you know. It's kind of no surprise to me now, but when I was going through my initial faith crisis, Back around 2000, I read that book and it was something I really tried to hold on to.

But at the same time, God was using other means to. Reach me with the true gospel. There was a guy at work, a Christian at work named Kevin, and he and I would sit and talk at lunch, and man, he would. Vex me to no end. In our conversations.

And I remember reading Believe in Christ and thinking, this is it. This is how I can prove to Kevin. That Mormons are Christians. I'll let him read this book.

So I gave it to him to read, and he came back with it a few days later and kind of tossed it down to me in the break room where I was eating lunch. And he's like, this is not the gospel, not even close. And just those kind of interactions helped me along the way to understanding what the gospel is.

So I just thought it was kind of fun. Funny that you brought that up. But Michael, your section where you talk about Nephi and his brothers trying to cast their riches before. Laban's servants, or before Laban, to buy the brass plates. It just reminds me of Revelation chapter 4, you know, where the 24 elders have crowns, but they cast them before the one sitting on the throne.

And they say to the one sitting on the throne, you know, you alone are worthy. Right. So yeah. Yeah, just it's there's there's nothing that we can bring. that you know I used to think that Yeah, that analogy made sense.

You know, you earn as much as you can. You can't pay for the bicycle. You're never going to pay for the bicycle. Your dad's going to have to help you. I used to think that that was the way that it worked.

But the reality of that is that you're never going to get the bicycle. You're never going to be worthy of it, you're never going to have enough money, enough works, enough righteousness of your own accord to get the bicycle.

So, how are you going to get the bicycle? You have to have it given you. By someone else. Amen.

Now, one of the things, this is actually a section where I have had some. Complaints from evangelicals. And you can probably imagine that a little bit because I do quote heavily from the Book of Mormon in this section. And so I've had some people write me and say, You do realize that the Book of Mormon is false and that Nephi is not a real person. To which I say, yes, this is my disclaimer.

I do recognize that Nephi and Lehi are fictional characters, and I do not believe the Book of Mormon, but our audience does. And it is a trusted source. And so I'm using it for that reason. And, you know, one of the things I think about is where Paul says in the Acts, where he's talking to the Greeks and says, even some of your own poets have said, we are also his offspring. And that, you know, those poets were not Christian.

They were not writing about the biblical God. Those poems were to Zeus, and yet Paul quotes them. And I think that there's some leniency in doing that because Paul did it. At the same time, I do understand that there could be, and this is where I think there's maybe a con to my article. If you're using it very heavily, it could instill that thought that, oh, maybe this is scripture.

Because he's using it so much. But again, I stand by what I said before, that this is a principle that is very hard to hold on to as a Latter-day Saint. Eventually, you're going to have to make that decision to either embrace the principle or the church. You can't have both. They are diametrically opposed to each other.

Yeah, you're right. I mean, when I, you know, Latter-day Saints are, especially lately, quick to quote recent leaders who are talking heavily about grace and giving messaging that, you know, you don't have to be perfect. And we've discussed how that is a different messaging than what we received in the time when we were. In the LDS church. And the messaging has shifted more towards grace.

But even in our episode where we discussed the Book of Mormon Central video that Matthew brought up, one of the teachers was. Presenting a more grace-filled message, and the other was presenting kind of the traditional. Perfectionism of Latter-day Saint teachings. And so, when Latter-day Saints kind of are quick to quote recent leaders. Talking about grace more, you know, I'm left thinking about Abraham 325, right?

The test is: will you do everything that God commands? You're going to be proven here with, right? Or I'm left thinking about, you know, I, the Lord, am bound when you do what I say, and when you do not what I say, you have no promise. Right? Those passages are scripture for Latter-day Saints.

So, Michael, you're right. If a Latter-day Saint reads your article and thinks Yeah, I like this. And look, the Book of Mormon teaches imputed righteousness. I'm fine staying here. They're eventually going to run up against the rocks of Abraham 325 or DNC 8210, you know, those other passages that are going to make them shudder, I think.

Yeah, I think so too. And with some of this recent messaging, even the most grace-filled message that comes out of the church is still going to have an undercurrent of the gospel of amputation. And if you dig into a Latter-day Saint and you ask them, do you believe that baptism is essential in order to reach the celestial kingdom? They will say yes. And so that is that 45 cents that you've got to pay to get that bicycle.

And so it is a different gospel than what we believe in, ultimately. And so, and if they don't believe it, if they deny it, then that's a good thing. But the next question is: well, then what is the difference between our beliefs then? Because then there is no difference in. They don't need.

The LDS church is what they're saying. And so it's a fine line that they are walking right now. But the other thing they'll say is, like, you're right, they do like to quote the new leaders. And what I, the reason I like to use the Book of Mormon so much is because every Latter-day Saint has a testimony that the Book of Mormon is true. That it is valid.

And so it's just an opportunity to pin them down a little bit on all of these beliefs that perfection is required to enter heaven, that man cannot receive perfection or be perfect. And that Christ's righteousness is given to us, all of those things can be found in the pages of the Book of Mormon. Can I push back a little bit on this article? Yeah, please.

So, this is one of the passages, that 2 Nephi passage is 2 Nephi 4. That was one of the ones that really touched me as a Latter-day Saint. And when I was questioning, I was that was one of the passages that I thought, man, you know, God's really spoke to me, and He's really. Worked in me using that passage and giving me comfort because he talks about how wretched he feels and how sinful he is. And, you know, but he knows in whom he has trusted, which is Christ.

So, um, but that's one of the. passages I also found that was basically from the Bible.

So you can find a similar passage in Romans 7. Was it Romans 7 or Romans 6? Uh let's see. Seven. Yeah, seven.

Thank you. I was rereading those earlier because I thought it would come up. Uh in the starting with verse 21, he says, uh, I don't like this version. I'll switch.

So, well, you know, I'll go with King James. Why not? Listeners, new King James, drop the new King James. Oh man, but uh, but then that's not the pure, uh, inerrant, uh, preserved word of God like the King James is. No, I'm not a King James only, I'm just kidding.

Uh, but yeah, so starting verse 21, he says, I find then a law that When I would do good, evil is um Present with me, for I delight in the law of God after the inward man, but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this body of death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

So then, with the mind, I'm.

So, with the mind, I myself serve the law of God, but with the law. But with the flesh, the law of sin.

So it's similar wording there.

So are you saying that is Paul teaching the gospel of amputation there? Actually, I think that both passages. Are teaching the gospel of imputation. And that's why I used that passage of Nephi saying that I've got all these sins that beset me. Nevertheless, I know in whom I've trusted.

And so the reason that's such a powerful verse to use. Is because he's saying, I do have these sins, but I believe I can be saved despite them because I am trusting in Christ.

So he's not finding solace in the fact that, you know, I've repented. or anything like that, he's saying, I know in whom I have trusted. You're right, they are very similar wording. If I wanted to go out on a limb, I would say that, you know. That's where the idea for Second Nephi came from was from that passage.

I mean, they both have the oh, wretched man that I am, which is a little suspect. And we're really far out on a limb on that one. Yeah, I agree with kind of what you've been saying, Michael. And plus, you have to remember that. Romans 7 comes after Romans 1 through 6.

which he expounds how the law makes us known Our sin in ourselves. He said, when he knew the law, then he died to sin. You know, he basically the s the sin that he had been committing. When he understood the law, when God worked in him, the law became real and it made him. Conscious of his sin, but he points back to Abraham in Genesis and says, You know, how was Abraham found righteous with God?

It says he believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness.

So he's teaching imputed righteousness all throughout that book.

So it wouldn't make sense for him to go in chapter seven and then teach amputated righteousness.

So, yeah, I agree with you. I just was just trying to think of an objection that a Latter-day Saint might have. Yeah, no, that's that's good. Glad you brought it up. All right, am I good to go to the next section?

All right, this is called The Tree of Life in His Vision. Lehi saw an iron rod leading to a tree with fruit that gave joy to all those who ate of it. There was an iron rod that led to this tree. In 1 Nephi 11:22, it's revealed that the tree represents the love of God. If I can expound on this imagery further, I think the tree represents the cross of Christ, and the fruit is his grace.

The iron rod ends at the cross because there's nowhere to go beyond that. Colossians 2:13 through 14 teaches the vicarious atonement in a nutshell. It says, And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses, blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to the cross. Romans 10:4 asserts that Jesus is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth. Where does this leave the LDS church with its saving ordinances and covenants?

In one sense, it renders the Church obsolete. The Gospel of Imputation puts the emphasis on Jesus and hangs salvation on His merits alone. He effectively becomes our baptism, sealing, and endowment. He becomes our priesthood and our temple. Romans 4, 24 through 25 teach that Christ's righteousness is accredited to our accounts when we believe in him.

However, Mormonism isn't a bad thing either if it's viewed in its proper context. There's no system or religion that can generate righteousness, not even the covenants of the restored gospel.

However, Mormonism is extremely useful when identified as a schoolmaster bringing us to Christ. There are so many ways being raised as a Latter-day Saint has helped me understand and appreciate grace in a way I never could have if I'd been raised Protestant. In Galatians 3, 25, Paul says that once faith is obtained, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. If viewed this way, the LDS Church must be given up in order to Gain something better. Thanks to the vicarious atonement, your work has been done.

The only question that remains is: will you accept it?

So, in this section, you kind of compare growing up Latter-day Saint to some of the things Paul says. With regards to his life in rabbinic Judaism and as a Pharisee. Would you agree with that, that that's kind of what you're doing in this section, that Paul had to come to understand Jesus as the end of the law, something that he had been schooled in? Uh, just in a similar way, you had to come to understand Jesus as the end of Mormonism. Is that kind of what you're saying here?

Absolutely. What I would say that I'm trying to do in this section. You know, one thing is, we tend to really. try to go after Mormonism's throat. when we're talking to Latter-day Saints.

So I wanted to say, look, there is a use. For Mormonism, and that is to view it in a way that it is the training wheels to come to Christ. You know, you need the training wheels initially, but you get to a point where you just don't need them. Anymore. And absolutely, you know, I was LDS, I felt the weight.

I think the LDS Church is probably as good as any organization out there with putting the weight on you so that you realize that you cannot. Achieve it on your it by yourself. And then with the temple and the book of Mormon teaching imputed righteousness, it really did point to Christ. And I know a lot of people may not agree or understand that, but one scripture that I think of a lot is in 1 John chapter 1. Talking about Christ when it says the light shines in the darkness and the darkness has not overcome it.

Meaning that we can't put Christ in a box or say that He cannot, you know, His grace cannot extend into the Mormon church or a Mormon temple. It's like, no, He is the God of the entire universe. And I believe that He put those things. In place where a Latter-day Saint can see them. And grab a hold, and it's a bridge straight to the gospel of imputation.

To the gospel of grace. I like, I wanted to use that approach in this article because a lot of times when you just go after why Mormonism is wrong, even if a Mormon comes to disbelieve it, they go straight into atheism or agnosticism. And so I wanted to say, look, there is a path to the true gospel here from Mormonism to grace. Hope that answers your question. Matthew, did you have something?

Yeah, I was waiting for you if you had anything to add. Yeah, no, that's great. I really love the way you explained that. Thank you, Michael. Well, I was also reading one of the comments, too.

I don't know if we wanted to talk about it. Maybe we can a little bit. Not the long one, the one from Gary, the shorter one. Yeah, it's. It's interesting how you compared the LDS church to a schoolmaster, how you kind of use that to lead you to Christ and how you said that it can be used by God to lead people to Christ.

So do you think that as we've talked about how LDS leaders are leaning more toward grace, do you think that at the moment there's enough of the true gospel there that if a Latter-day Saint is humbled to the point where they feel like, I can't do it, I know that I need to be perfect. I know I need to be righteous. But just asking Jesus to help me is not good enough. Is there enough of the gospel being taught in the church nowadays? That you think they could grasp onto the true gospel and be born again?

I think there's a concerted effort in the church right now. the LDS church to be a chameleon and act like they are Evangelical almost when they are preaching these messages. And I think the intent of that. Is to confuse outsiders into really thinking that they are Christian. And so that we will lower our guard and little bit easier to convert.

I think that's the intention.

However, I do think it is a double-edged sword. I think that there is enough of the true gospel that God can reach down and that he can convict somebody's heart and that they can be saved in Mormonism.

So I think it not only confuses outsiders, but I think it can confuse members of the LDS church too. Uh, you said at the beginning that the purpose of this article is not to talk about obedience after faith, so that would be kind of like a follow-up topic. But just because I know there's going to be a lot of Latter-day Saints, like you know, biting at the you know, chomping at the bit, saying, Well, Jesus said you need to follow him. need to obey his commandments if we love him. And I think we as Christians would all say amen to that.

Jesus did say. He did say to come follow me.

So we're not talking about a gospel where we can just sit in our lounge chairs and say, well, yeah, I believe. And you know, not strive after righteousness, not strive after. You know, overcoming and mortifying or killing our sins, you know, becoming more like Jesus.

So, could you give like a brief explanation to that and how that fits in with this article, maybe? I will.

So, basically, one thing that I've explained to Latter-day Saints in the past is that no matter which gospel you believe in, you will believe in the other one to an extent as well.

So, one of them is going to be the parent gospel, and the other one is going to be basically the child gospel in relationship.

So, for example, say you believe in the gospel of amputation, I'm going to amputate all of my sins, and then the fruit of that. Is going to be imputation, you know, that I'm going to be saved. Or, you know, a lot of Latter-day Saints will say that they believe imputation. My brother would be one of those, but it comes at baptism.

So you've got to do your part first. It's that whole mantra that a lot of Latter-day Saints have, which is, I'll do my best and then. price will do the rest. Whereas it flips around for us as Christians. Imputation is what saves us.

But after that, there is a fruit that comes out of it where we are. Sacrificing, where we are being obedient. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the salvation itself. It is a fruit of that salvation, of that changed heart.

So we go into a process called sanctification. And what I would compare it to is marriage. And I know you don't know a whole lot about that, Matthew, but you will soon. Dune, what are you talking about? You got something going on in the background I don't know about?

He prophesied my death and now your marriage. He's coming out as a prophet. I don't think you have to be a prophet to predict Matthew's marriage. I mean, he's like the most eligible bachelor on earth. But basically, what I was going to say is: you know, you get married by just saying I do, right?

I mean, it. And then afterwards, after you're married, you do chores, right? Like you take out the garbage and stuff like that.

So, what I would say is, you know, a Latter-day Saint saying that you have to be obedient. Uh to be saved. Is like saying that you're not really married until you've taken out the garbage so many times and washed dishes so many times. And actually, it doesn't work that way at all. The marriage itself.

shouldn't dissolve based on that. You know, chores do not make the relationship or the covenant, the promise of marriage. It is a fruit. You know, you can tell more or less that somebody is that a couple is married based on how they behave and how they love each other. And That is what we are in.

We are in a marriage with Christ. The church is his bride. And so we are. We are just living out that relationship now. And I know Latter-day Saints will jump on that and they will say, Oh, so you believe you can sin as much as you want.

And what I will respond typically. Is I'll say, is there somebody in your life that loves you unconditionally? You know, maybe a spouse or a parent. And they'll say yes. And I'll say, then is your intention to betray that person as much as you can?

And of course, they'll say no. I mean, it's really. Kind of ridiculous when you think about it in a real life scenario. People just don't behave that way. When there's somebody that loves you and you're in a relationship, you try to please that person, and it is a natural you Um, does that you think that explains it, Matthew?

Do you want to add anything to it? I think that's great, yeah. And the I mean, even s the scripture talks about how God compares marriage to A union between Christ and his church. And that's why God has such strong words against divorce, because if it represents the union between Christ and his church, which doesn't separate, we should, if at all possible. And there's also always circumstances that would.

you know that would result in you know That being dissolved, but we should try to stay with our spouse, you know, for our lives. And so I think that is a really good explanation.

Now, the thing that I would think is a Latter-day Saint that I would push back on is like, well, what if a spouse breaks the marriage covenant and Does something that would, you know, like, you know, cheats or does whatever, abandons a spouse, and then that would cause a divorce.

So, isn't that admitting that you can lose your salvation? Because that's something that Latter-day Saints will often push. They'll say, well, There's all these passages that show you can lose your salvation.

So, why do you, evangelicals, believe that you can't lose it?

So, how would you kind of deal with that one? I think what I would do is, I would turn to the Gospels where Jesus, you know, he's asked by the Pharisees, you know, well, why did Moses allow a writing of divorce. And he says, because of the hardness of their hearts, you know, Moses allowed this, but from the beginning, It was not so. And Jesus has some very strong words for those who. who divorced, you know, saying that it's adultery.

Or you're causing somebody to commit adultery, you know, so it's not, it's a man thing. It's not a god thing, you know, it's not. For our God to uh To abandon us or to end the marriage, and yeah, they'll usually say, like, well, I can, you know, I have the agency, right? I can choose to leave. It's like, well, what happens when that occurs in scripture?

You know, what happens when the sheep strays? Christ runs out and gets it, right?

So he's a good husband. The bride runs off and he goes after her.

So, no, there's no ending. To that marriage, it is permanent. But that's where the despair comes, right? Because I can't remember who. I think Matthew, you brought it up a week or so ago.

I don't know who said the quote, maybe, but it's something like, If it were possible to lose your salvation, you would, right? And that's where the despair of Latter-day Saints comes in. On the one hand, they want to argue and say, I've got the agency. You Christians are silly for believing in. in the preservation of the saints.

You know, but if you could lose your salvation, you would. We were still beset by sin. Latter-day Saints know it. I knew it. I know it.

And so If you could, you would. And, you know, Latter-day Saints say, you know, no unclean thing can enter the. presence of god well who's who's who's going to be clean minus the the full righteousness of christ because if any if any measure of it depends on your righteousness you you're out and so I don't understand why Latter-day Saints argue for, you know, hey, we can lose our salvation. Yeah.

And the thought that just popped into my head, too, real quick is. That's what it really means to lose your salvation when you think about it, especially understanding imputed righteousness. It means that righteousness has to be unimputed. You know, you're adopted as a child of God, so you've got to be unimputed. Unadopted.

And you ask any Latter-day Saint: you know, your child. Breaks your rules in the house, are you going to throw them out on the street? And none of them would. You know, they're all gonna admit that that would be cruel. You know, or if your spouse breaks your rules, are you going to kick them out on the street?

It's like, no, because, and it's like, yeah, a father might punish his children somehow, but It's not going to be so severe that it's like, you're not my child anymore.

So, why would God behave that way? Why should they expect him to be that way? It just seems so petty. And, you know, it's just like. I love having like being able to rest in my salvation and just knowing that God has me.

Despite what I may and what I will. Do in the future. Isn't that a blessed feeling to know that it's not about you, it's about turning you. turning back to Christ. There were so many times as a Latter-day Saint, I just felt hopeless, you know?

Like, I'd feel like I'd be doing pretty good, you know, be like on a roller coaster, and then I'd completely fall down into a valley. And I have to try to drag myself back up. And now it's like with the doctrine of imputed righteousness, we're going to have days where we fall. We're going to have weeks where we sin more, where we might slip back into a sin that we had before and we say, man, you know, I've really got to work on this. And No, we have to repent.

And so faith and repentance is a thing that Christians should do. And that we Should practice because scripture commands it, but our standing with the Lord is not affected by it, it's a sanctification process. We're still just. justified were still declared righteous. Before God through faith alone in Christ, but our sanctification does not determine our standing before God.

And I, and there will be a day when we will be delivered from this body of sin, as Paul's talking about in Romans 7.

So, there is hope that there's some at some point Jesus will completely save us from this sin nature, which I don't know. As a Latter-day Saint, did you ever get that feeling? To me, it felt like I'll have to, and I think it goes to that comment that someone posted. I'll just quickly quote a line from it: This is a probationary state.

So, this is from Gary, who posted on your blog. He said, This is a probationary state. But Alma did not say we couldn't repent after this life, which, as you stated, is harder without a body and not being able to live in a physical world for which it was intended.

So, Christ wants us to be saved on His conditions of repentance. They're his con Through his atoning grace and love.

So they're kind of agreeing that what we've said in the past is like at some point we will have to repent of all of our sins. We'll basically have to stop sinning completely by our repentance. Is that kind of what you're getting out of that also? Yeah, that is what I'm getting out of there is, you know, they may say, oh, well, we're saved by grace. You know, it's all Christ, but they're not telling the whole story.

There's going to be another life if we haven't finished repenting. It's kind of similar to purgatory in a lot of ways, I think, but we're going to have to pay for our sins one way or another. And they're going to have to all be repented of. Because no unclean thing can enter the kingdom of heaven. And I think it gets a little bit convoluted sometimes because they'll say, oh, but it's gonna take us eternities, you know.

To become totally perfect, it's not going to be something that's going to happen anytime soon. And I'm just constantly thinking to myself: do you really think Judgment Day is eternities off? You know, that day is going to come, and we have to be spotless one way or another. And I think Latter-day Saints realize that deep down. It also destroys the beauty of.

the parable with um The rich man and Lazarus, because there was the rich man at the table. He wasn't feeding Lazarus. You know, he's picking up crumbs off of the table. And when they both died, the Lazarus, he was brought up into Abraham's bosom. Doesn't say anything about millennia or thousands of years or eternity.

Repenting, it says he was immediately caught up into Abraham's bosom.

So it kind of destroys this idea of. We need all this time to repent and then we can enter heaven. I did want to respond to something that Gary said.

So he says that the Book of Mormon does not say that we cannot repent after this life. But then he concedes that it is harder to repent there, which still puts Mormonism in a really precarious spot. Because, like I said in the article, if you can't do it here, then there's not much hope of doing it. In the spirit world, if it's harder, but here's what Amma 42:13 actually says. I didn't quote it in the article.

Says, therefore, according to justice, the plan of redemption could not be brought about only on conditions of repentance of men in this probationary state, yea, this preparatory state. And by the way, anytime the Book of Mormon says that, it's talking about mortal life. For except it were for these conditions, mercy could not take effect except it should destroy the work of justice.

Now, the work of justice could not be destroyed. If so, God would cease to be God.

So, basically, what this is saying is if repentance can occur outside of the probationary state, outside of mortality. It destroys the justice of God.

So I understand that. You know, Gary is saying that that isn't church doctrine, and he's right. It's not LDS doctrine.

However, it is what the Book of Mormon states quite plainly. Yeah, that's true. And I was reminded of Alma. 34, yeah, Alma 34, 34, which says, you cannot say when you're brought to that awful crisis that I will repent and I will return to my God. Nay, you cannot say this, for the same spirit which doth possess your bodies at the time that ye go out of this life, that same spirit will have power to possess your body in that eternal world.

So, you know, what is it Gary? What Gary's kind of alluding to there is teaching that I remember receiving as a Latter-day Saint that, you know, especially with regards to the word of wisdom, if you're a drunkard, if you smoke, if you do something that, you know, ruins your body here, that same spirit will. Will possess you when you go out of this world.

So it's gonna be, when he says it's gonna be harder. To repent, there he's referring to that kind of teaching, which was, you know. You know, your addictions are going to follow you into that world. Whatever sin besets you now is going to, and you allow yourself to be overtaken by, will follow you into the next world. And it'll be even harder to repent there.

Man, what a hopeless message. Yeah.

And it's like it follows right behind what they try to. Promote as a hopeful message. Which is, you get another chance after this life. But then the small writing at the bottom of the contract says, but it's harder to do it there than here. It's like, oh, okay, never mind.

That doesn't give me hope.

Now, I did actually get some criticism on this last section of my article.

So, I will read the sentence here that. That people kind of heckled me over and explain, I kind of have explained it, but just one last time here.

Okay, so I said, however, Mormonism isn't a bad thing either. If it's viewed in its proper context, you guys wouldn't believe how many messages I got saying, how can I say such a thing? That is not. Speaking the truth. Mormonism is very bad.

It's satanic, et cetera, et cetera. Again, just to clarify, I was talking about in one particular instance for one particular function, and that is. Coming to Christ with it. And I would say the exact same thing with any sin or any problem. That we have in human life that drives us and pins us against the wall, drives us to our knees, and leaves us prostrate on the ground, hoping for nothing but Christ's grace, is a good thing in the respect that it brings us to Christ.

I'm not saying that I think Mormonism is a good thing in general, just for any listeners that got that impression. Yeah, and I wanted to jump in here earlier and kind of touch on this, but. I think now's the right time for it. You know, my biblical namesake was a wretched sinner. He went about persecuting the church, stood by while Stephen was stoned to death, holding the garments of those who were throwing the stones.

The brand of Pharisaic Judaism that he followed. The zeal that he had was misplaced. But all of that was redeemed by God. And because he had been through it, he wrote some of the most beautiful and amazing. Scripture that we have.

And I'm not suggesting, Michael, that you're writing scripture with this article, but I think it's important to remember that. God saves and God redeems our stories. Coming out of Mormonism. is very difficult. It leads to anger.

It leads to frustration and those emotions. often lead to Agnosticism and atheism as people have anger towards God. And so, your article extending that olive branch and saying, hey, you know what, sometimes. That story is redeemed by God. That personal story that somebody went through is redeemed by God.

I think that's true. I think it is a reality that each of us has experienced. and that we hope other Latter-day Saints will experience as they come to know. The true God and his son, Jesus Christ. Yeah, and I'm kind of extending this olive branch to ex-Mormons as well.

I know that it's really easy for ex-Mormons to look back at the church and feel really bitter and angry. And so to them, I'm also saying there's another way to look at this as a positive thing in our lives. And it's really helped me to look at it that way so that I'm not consumed with bitterness and anger. Myself. But along the lines of what you were saying, Paul, I also think about.

Uh, Joseph in Egypt, you know, his brothers sold him into Egypt, and certainly that was a very bad thing, you know. And I love what Joseph says to them, you know, later on in Genesis: you know, you meant it for evil, um, but God, Matthew, what's the you can probably quote this better than me. You had it, keep going. You meant it for evil, but God meant it for good. Yeah, you got it, yeah, essentially, yep.

Genesis chapter 50. Yeah.

Yeah.

So it was an evil action. But because of that evil action, you know, God was able to use it and it saved the entire house of Israel.

So, yeah, I'm not saying the action is good, but yeah, like you said, Paul, God redeems the things that we do. And I think God has a hand in the way that Mormonism was structured, where there are these. These bridges that lead straight to Christianity. If you know where to look, so yeah, that's pretty much the reason for my article is just to point some of those out. Yeah, that's great.

Thank you for sharing that. I don't really have anything to add to what you guys have said. Great stuff. Yeah, I agree. Yeah, I appreciate you guys giving me the chance to go through the article.

It means a lot to me. Yeah, it was really great. I thought it was really well written. I could see, like you said, a lot of evangelicals and apologists getting kind of triggered at the way the data is presented. But I think you've presented your case really well for the purpose of it.

Appreciate it. We thank you for tuning in to this episode of the Outer Brightness Podcast. We'd love to hear from you. Please visit the Outer Brightness podcast page on Facebook. Feel free to send us a message there with comments or questions by clicking send a message at the top of the page, and we would appreciate it if you give the page a like.

We also have an Outer Brightness group on Facebook where you can join and interact with us and others as we discuss the podcast, past episodes, and suggestions for future episodes, etc. You can also send us an email at outerbrightness at gmail.com. We hope to hear from you soon. You can subscribe to the Outer Brightness podcast on Apple Podcasts, Castbox, Google Podcasts, Pocket Cast, Podbeat, Spotify, and Stitcher. Also, you can check out our new YouTube channel, and if you like it, be sure to lay hands on that subscribe button and confirm it.

If you like what you hear, please give us a rating and review wherever you listen and help spread the word. You can also connect with Michael the ex-Mormon apologist at fromwatertowine.org, where he blogs and sometimes Paul and Matthew do as well. Music for the Outer Brightness podcast is graciously provided by the talented Brianna Flournoy and by Adams Rode. Learn more about Adams Road by visiting their ministry page at Adamsroad Ministry dot com. Stay bright, Fireflies.

To whom shall we go? You have the way. Words of eternal life. And we Be happy. And I've come to know.

That you are. The whole Holy One of God, the worthy flesh, the risen Son, heaven and earth will pass away, but the word of the Lord endures forever. All of this world is indecay. But the word of our God through ages reveal Lord, you promised that we as your church would remain upon this rock, and the gates of hell would not prevail. Against us, cause you have power to keep your word unspoiled and purity.

Heaven and earth will pass away, but the word of the Lord endures forever. All of this world is indecay. But the word of our God through ages remain as the rain falls down from heaven and waters the earth, bringing it light.

So the word that goes out from your mouth will not return empty, but does. What you desire, Lord. We hear your word and believe in you. Heaven and earth will pass away, but the word of our Lord endures forever. All of this world is in decay.

But the word of our God through ages remains the word of God remains. This is the Truth Network.