Callister’s Infinite Atonement — Part 2

One member is examining the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints from a biblical perspective viewpoint when Mormonism is sponsored by Mormonism research ministry since 1979 Mormonism research ministry has been dedicated to equipping the body of Christ with answers regarding the Christian faith in a manner that expresses gentleness and respect. And now, your host for today's viewpoint on Mormonism so glad to agree with us for this additional viewpoint on Mormonism on your host, Bill McKeever, founder and director Mormonism research ministry with me today is Eric Johnson. My colleague at MRM we continue our look at a book titled the infinite atonement. It was written by Tad R. Callister, a very popular LDS author. We can't give you a little bit of an introduction as to what this book entails but I want to read to you from the inside jacket of the hardcopy edition where it says with the infinite atonement brother Tad are Callister offers us what may be the most comprehensive yet understandable treatment of the atonement in our day. Eric would you think about that description because certainly he's going to give a Mormon view of the atonement, but I don't think he is a very accurate appraisal of what the Bible has to say regarding our understanding of the atonement. I think you're exactly right because, as we mentioned yesterday the word atonement is the same word but when you take a look at what Mormonism has traditionally taught and what Callister is teaching as well and you take a look at what the Bible has to say about atonement, you're going to get two different versions, and I think people are going to see that as we go through some of the writing of what Callister has given us, but we need to understand as I mentioned yesterday, the way that the Christian views the atonement can. I think be summarized in the book of Hebrews where Jesus is playing both the role of high priest and also plane the sacrifice himself. And as far as going back to what took place in the Old Testament temple. It was all about sacrifice will Jesus plays that role of the priest as well as the sacrifice.

Just listen to some of the verses and this is found on our website MRM.org/the infinite atonement with hyphens between those three words and you can see that what I'm talking about in Hebrews 414 through 15.

Jesus is the great high priest. He was tempted but was without sin. In chapter 5 verses five through six.

Jesus was appointed by the father to be a high priest that was a human in the Old Testament and Jesus as a human also plays that role of the high priest. Chapter 713 28 Jesus is a priest in the order of Melchizedek and that is something very special that Jesus had only, and we should mention that just because it uses this, the priest of the order of Melchizedek. It is not at all in comparison to what Mormons believe regarding their unique Melchizedek priesthood dry. He was a priest after the order of Melchizedek.

It doesn't say he was a Melchizedek priest and I think that's that needs to be brought out. Yes, I think you're right.

Chapter 8137. Jesus is the priest of a better covenant. The new covenant chapter 8 verse 13.

The old covenant was made obsolete in chapter 9 verse 12, Jesus entered the holy place, not through the blood of animals, but by his own blood. Chapter 9 verse 14 the blood of Jesus is capable of purifying our conscience from dead works. It's an interesting phrase in chapter 9 verse 14 of Hebrews and then in chapter 9 verses 25 through 28.

Jesus offered once for all. In the sacrifice to put away sin. Chapter 10 verse 12 Christ sits down at the right hand of the father. Chapter 10 verse 14. His single offering has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified and I think that's a verse that is often missed on many Latter Day Saints and it's one that I like to inject into the conversation because Wally Mormon may think that his personal good works are what's necessary in order to be properly sanctified, we find from this verse that it was Jesus's offering his offering perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

Those that are being sanctified. Of course would be the believer in this particular case, because it was a past tense, justified, and now he's in the process of being sanctified and then finally chapter 10 verse 17 for this list that I put together our sins will be remembered no more. And that is the goal in Christianity to receive Jesus and to have our sins forgiven as you like to say Bill it's the main difference between us and all other religions. Will that verse seven in verse 17 that you decided that sins will be remembered no more. Do Mormons really believe that or do they believe according to section 82 in the doctrine and covenants that if they are to sin that a particular sin against their former sins return, saith the Lord. So I would think they would have a difficulty in embracing Hebrews 1017 fill in this book he's going to show some of the differences between what we as evangelical Christians believe and what Mormonism teaches in one point that he makes very clear in the early part of the book is that in Mormonism there is no such thing as original sin and that the fall was necessary if people were to become gods.

He mentions on page 24 that the atonement was meant quote to provide the power necessary to exalt us to the status of the God that he cites doctrine and covenants 7669.

How many evangelicals do you know if you were to ask what was the purpose of the atonement and what it does in and what does it do for you.

How many evangelicals would say to provide the power necessary to be exulted in to be of God while I'm hoping that the Christians who are listening to this broadcast right now will be bothered by that very citation because, as I just mentioned. The goal of the atonement for the Christian what we receive out of that is the forgiveness of our sins not to become a God. Certainly, we will become glorified, but not in the same status that Mormonism hopes that someday they can become gods of their own right. In other words, we do not believe that we will be repeating a process that Mormonism teaches that is been has been going on since eternity past that mortal men are enabled to become a God and then they are to procreate on their world offspring, who in turn if they are good enough will also become gods. There's no teaching like that in Christian history that is certainly unique to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints on page 36. Callister explains that Adam and Eve only disobeyed a warning and not a commandment. He says some people feel that the command not to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil was more a warning than a commandment and thus Adam and Eve purposely quote unquote disobeyed a lower law in order to fulfill a higher one. I think this goes back to what Mormon theologians have tried to explain, as far as no Adam and Eve didn't sin. They merely transgressed and I'm I can never understand that kind of an explanation, especially in light of first John three, four, that makes it very clear that sin is a transgression of the law. They are synonymous. But for some reason Mormon scholars Mormon theologians don't like that comparison and he seems to be doing it here when he says some people feel that the command quote" not to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge was more of a warning than a commandment. First of all, folks ask yourself who are the some people that's not me Eric that's not you. I don't think any evangelical Christian would go so far as to say that it was not a command. Certainly, the Bible tells the story as if it was in fact the command did not God tell them not to partake of the fruit, not just merely a warning but what would you think would be a difference between a warning and a command, as were talking about right here will you and I have discussed this and I think one analogy that seems to explain it properly would be something like a parent telling their child. If you play in the street you could be hit by a car that sounds like a warning.

But if the parent was to say don't play in the street because you might get hit by a car. Now it becomes both a warning and a commandment. And this is where I think Callister Mrs. certainly the way it is worded in the book of Genesis, Adam and Eve were told. Definitely not to partake. Certainly there were going to be consequences as a result of partaking that would be the warning portion of it, but when he says don't partake that is a command. This is what it says in Genesis 3.

Three. Eve reports to that God said you must not eat from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it or you will die as you just gave the illustration is not a warning that's a command and what is the result of the 70. Paul talks about this in Romans chapter 5. He says that sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin.

See there was disobedience and because they did what they were not supposed to. Therefore, it brought the consequence.

It's interesting that Paul didn't say transgression in the world now is sin entered the world. Callister does say in his book on page 41. The fall was not a tragic step backward to the contrary, it was a painful, but nonetheless giant step forward in our eternal journey. It was the springboard to our ascent and that would go along with what it teaches in the book of Mormon and second Nephi 225, where it speaks of Adam falling that men might be in men are that they might have joy. So it was a necessary thing that had to happen. I don't even know if many Mormons would go so far as to say it was unnecessary evil. I don't think a lot of Latter Day Saints look at it as being all that evil quote unquote listen to what he says on page 38 and he's referring to Adam and Eve. This is what he says they are to be commended, not condemned. Someday we will know the full stature of their nobility if they consciously partook of the fruit sufficiently. Understanding the consequences. We honor them if they partook an innocence or partially deceived, and thereafter learn the plan of salvation because of their obedience and faithfulness which plan they thereafter taught with love and diligence to their prosperity. Then again, we honor them.

I don't know of too many Bible believing Christians that would go along with that paragraph Adam and Eve are to become mended and not condemn that when he says if they consciously partook of the fruit sufficiently. Understanding the consequences. We honor them. Do you think that they were consciously understanding all the effects that would happen from that one act I don't get that impression when they go running for fig leaves. You would think they would already have the fig leaves prepared. If they knew what was going to happen but yet they know it's kind of like now all of a sudden a drastic change is taking place. Her eyes are open and they're actually kinda shocked already that what is happen to them personally what Callister does, he does is on page 46 is show the universalism of Mormonism's atonement, which is efficacious for everybody who's a human because they chose wisely in the preexistence. He cites fellow Mormon Robert J Matthews and this is what Robert J. Matthew said there is a prevailing idea that although the resurrection is free.

Only those who repent and obey the gospel will never return to the presence of God. Those who adhere to this idea, however, seem to have missed a very essential point and fundamental concept of the atonement in this is that Jesus Christ has redeemed all mankind from all the consequences of the fall of Adam that statements confusing to me because certainly Mormonism teaches that all are going to be resurrected, but he makes it sound like we're a minute to believe that only those who repent and obey the gospel will ever return to the presence of God. Numerous Mormon Mormon leaders have said just that. In fact you can even hope to be in the presence of God unless you keep celestial law because it's in the celestial that God dwells. If you are only good enough to get to the terrestrial kingdom, your hopes of ever being with the father lost he wants nothing to do with you after the judgment takes place. So all Mormons may talk about this loving heavenly father seems like this loving heavenly father is not going to want anything to do with any of his children who did not meet his high standards during their mortality. Thank you for listening. If you would like more information when guarding his research ministry. We encourage you to visit our website www.mrm.org you can request our free newsletter Mormonism research.

We hope you will join us again as we look at another viewpoint is