Skepticism Over Validity of Ex-Gay Story Prompts 'Confessions'

coltakashi »

Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:02 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Apparently it is more important to some people what brand of Christianity a man embraces than it is that he has repented from a longstanding lifestyle that had rejected Christ and actively opposed God's commandments concerning sexual chastity. Why not be glad he has moved in the direction of truth? Those who reject him are like the older son in the parable of the Prodigal Son, who was unwilling to embrace and forgive his repentant brother, even though their Father had done so. If you thus choose to stand outside the feast, you are not going to be inside with God.

Many Evangelical Christians, in rejecting the significance of works, and the necessity of a church to mediate salvation, assert that all that is required to obtain salvation through Christ is a simple confession of faith in his saving grace. With the other Protestant Reformers, who had to reject the authority of the Catholic Church, they assert the Priesthood of Believers, so that no authority is needed to perform baptism other than belief in the Bible. It is therefore utterly inconsistent, not to say hypocritical, when people who insist that the requirements for salvation are so minimal ALSO claim that people who affirm that they have accepted Christ as their Savior and been baptized in His name and accept the Bible as true are somehow NOT really saved. Apparently Southern Baptists and other Evangelicals have extra requirements for members of other churches which they do not apply to themselves.

Even more ridiculous is the fact that many Evangelicals insist that the logical deduction of the unimportance of works is that no matter what sins one commits after being "saved" you are still "saved". Anyone who believes this has to logically conclude that if a "saved" person in their church later goes on to become a Catholic or a Mormon, he is still "saved". They should therefore have no objection to the conversion of Southern Baptists or others to Mormonism, since it does not and cannot affect their salvation. Yet such people claim it is a great tragedy if a Baptist becomes a Mormon.

If you really believe in "cheap grace" without works, and in assured salvation regardless of subsequent actions, then you have no religious basis to question the salvation of Mormons in general, and of members of your church who become Mormons in particular.

On the other hand, if you DON'T believe in "cheap grace" but believe that works have a role in salvation, either in fulfilling a requirement placed by God (Arminianism, Wesleyism) or manifesting the reality of ones being "born again", then you can hardly criticize Mormons for believing the same thing, namely that (a) man's works alone can never attain salvation (b) Christ's grace alone, without assent and repentance, cannot save a person, and thus (c) there must be an ACT of faith and repentance, of man accepting Christ sincerely and changing his heart, in order to be "born again" and "saved".

You either accept a role for free will and man's choice in salvation, or you don't. If you don't, it is pointless to dispute with anyone over salvation, because they will be saved or damned regardless. If you do, then the Mormons agree with you, and you have no reason to argue with them on that basis. Either way, it is silly to criticize Mormons over their belief in the Arminian, Wesleyan approach to salvation.