Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Mormonism 101/Chapter 10

Chapter 9: D&C and Pearl of Gt Price

A FAIR Analysis of: Criticism of Mormonism/Books A work by author: Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson

Chapter 11: Grace and Works

Index of Claims in Chapter 10: The Atonement

by Edward T. Jones

In the preface of their book, Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson claim that their book is written to help meet the needs of those who "have sought a resource that compares the teachings of the Mormon leaders, both past and present, with those of the Bible." They also claim that in preparing that resource they "have purposely made an effort to not alter the meaning of any quote" and invite their readers to check out the context of any quotation which they provide, to determine its accuracy.1 They claim to have "studied this movement for a great portion of our lives," and "our experience has shown that far too many Latter-day Saints have not taken the time to do an in-depth investigation into the history and doctrines of their faith."2 They claim "the student of Mormonism still needs to carefully weigh what LDS leaders have said and are saying, since it gives us an idea of what kind of men they really are. For example, if certain LDS leaders continually make irresponsible comments, we must take that into consideration." The emphasis here is between what former LDS leaders said (i.e., nineteenth century) and what current leaders are saying (i.e., twentieth century). They make this abundantly clear when they write "the current presentation given by LDS Church leaders is much different than earlier years. When Joseph Smith began his new religious movement in 1830, there was no great effort to meld or compromise the teachings of the Mormon Church with those of nineteenth-century Christianity. Instead, early leaders prided themselves on their uniqueness and they boldly and publicly proclaimed their differences. They made little or no effort to associate with what they considered 'apostate Christendom.'3

Messers McKeever and Johnson need to understand that the rule they have established here is a two-edged sword: what the Christians said in the early days (Bible and Church Fathers) and what Christians are saying today can also be checked, and double checked, against accuracy and agreement. If the differences become apparent, can we also state that we will then have "an idea of what kind of men [modern Christian apologists] really are"? Furthermore, if certain (unnamed) LDS leaders are making irresponsible statements, then doesn't one have the obligation to determine exactly from whose viewpoint they are to be considered irresponsible: the LDS church, or mainstream Christian apologists? If they are irresponsible from the LDS standpoint, then they ought to be ignored, as not representing the true position of the LDS Church on that particular point of doctrine or practice. If they are irresponsible from the point of view of mainstream Christians, then…

Well, I guess that is what this review is really all about: to determine if the LDS position is as consistent with, or perhaps more consistent with, the Bible teachings, as those of mainstream Christianity today. McKeever and Johnson seek to emphasize 'alleged' differences between the early LDS Church leaders and those of more current venue. This amounts to a bias on their part, because they assume, and want their readers to assume, that such a difference actually exists, and that the difference is significant, that it indicates an 'apostasy' of the LDS Church from its beginning to the present day. The only way they can make this position valid however is to ignore statements from both time periods, statements which, when made, indicate that there is no such division.4 It is the observation of this reviewer that what most evangelical writers wish to see is a Mormon Systematic Theology, a volume that will give answers to all their gospel questions, and explain Mormon doctrine in a very neat and concise manner. What they fail to recognize (or choose to ignore, since they have studied the subject for so long!) is that letters written to a son-in-law do not hold the same authority within the Church as a talk given at a General Conference, which in turn does not hold the same authority as the words of canonized scripture.

This review of their chapter on the Atonement will seek to present the LDS position, not in a 'favorable' light, but in an accurate one. And that is what is needed most here: accuracy and honesty. Those who would bear false witness against another person or Church are seriously condemned by the Savior, and if Messers McKeever and Johnson have studied The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as thoroughly as they claim they have, then they are certainly guilty of bearing false witness. They claim that their book "is the result of our concern for those who belong to the LDS faith as well as for those Christians who want to better understand the beliefs of their Mormon friends, relatives, and neighbors."5 As this review will indicate, those friends, neighbors and relatives of the LDS Church will not have gained any real insights into the LDS faith by reading this book. Indeed, they will have been seriously misled regarding what the Latter-day Saints truly believe.

The point of their preface is to indicate that the LDS Church began as an enemy of Christianity, but has recently made an attempt to become more mainstream. They ask: "Can an individual or organization willfully deny or distort the basics of the Christian faith and still be considered Christian?" Without going into the question of what constitutes "the basics of Christian faith," much less the question of who it is who speaks authoritatively for "the Christian faith," one thing is certain: McKeever and Johnson do not speak authoritatively for either "the Christian faith" or for the LDS faith. This review seeks to determine what the proper LDS belief is regarding the Atonement of our Savior Jesus Christ. It should be indicated at the outset that if Messers McKeever and Johnson understand the Christian belief on this subject they do not exhibit such understanding; if they understand the LDS belief on that subject, then they have distorted it, often beyond recognition. Such distortion can only be considered deliberate, with malice of forethought, as they claim that in the writing of their book they have been "moved with the same compassion felt by the LDS missionaries and lay members who attempt to defend what they believe to be true." This, of course, has nothing to do with why missionaries are sent into the world; they go to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ, not to defend it against others' attacks. Most missionaries are totally unaware of anti-Mormon literature, at least for a month or two.6 In 1902 George Teasdale, of the Quorum of the Twelve, discussed the Great Mandate of Mark 16:15–6 to preach the gospel to all the world, teaching them to believe and be baptized. Elder Teasdale asked, and then answered, the question: to believe what? "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, in the atonement, in the resurrection, in holding communication with the heavens, in the spirit of revelation, in putting our trust in God, in doing good, in fulfilling our individual missions, and being in obedience to the principles of the Gospel." That is what the missionaries were expected to be teaching as they went out into the world.7 One would wish that Messers McKeever and Johnson had written a book detailing what they believe to be the true teachings of Jesus Christ, rather than an outright attack on the beliefs of others. Their approach to others' beliefs says much about their own.

Centrality of the Atonement in LDS Thought

This is the gospel which I have given unto you—that I came into the world to do the will of my Father, because my Father sent me. And my Father sent me that I might be lifted up upon the cross.8

McKeever and Johnson begin their discussion of the atonement by stating that mainstream Christians and Latter-day Christians "both accept the atonement of Christ." In thus stating it they seriously understate the position of the Church of Jesus Christ. Joseph Smith, the founding prophet, stated that "the fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it." Those appendages include the gift of the Holy Ghost, power of faith, enjoyment of the spiritual gifts, restoration of the house of Israel, and the final triumph of truth.9 The atonement of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the central fact of all LDS theological teaching. Almost one hundred years ago LDS historian and theologian Brigham H. Roberts wrote that the atonement

is the very heart of the Gospel from whose pulsations the streams of both spiritual and eternal physical life proceed. It is the fact which gives vitality to all things else in the Gospel. If the Atonement be not a reality then our preaching is vain; our baptisms and confirmations meaningless; the eucharist a mere mummery of words; our hope of eternal life without foundation; we are still in our sins, and we Christian men, of all men, are the most miserable. A theme that affects all this cannot fail of being important.10

In 1917 President Joseph F. Smith delivered an official statement on principles of government in the Church, which included the following statement: "A man who says he does not believe in the atoning blood of Jesus Christ who professes to be a member of the Church…but who ignores and repudiates the doctrine of the atonement… [I say that] the man who denies that truth and who persists in his unbelief is not worthy of membership in the Church."11 In 1924 General Conference Heber J. Grant, then President of the Church, stated that "any individual who does not acknowledge Jesus Christ as the Son of God, the Redeemer of the world, has no business to be associated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."12 Fourteen years later President Grant was just as emphatic: "We want it distinctly understood that we believe absolutely in Jesus Christ, that He was the Son of God, and that He did come to the earth with a divinely appointed mission to die on the cross as the Redeemer of mankind. We do not believe that He was just a 'great moral teacher,' but that He is our Redeemer."13 Elder Bruce R. McConkie has stated that the "atonement of Christ is the most basic and fundamental doctrine of the gospel."14 Speaking with reference to all who call themselves Christian, which obviously included the Latter-day Saints, Brigham Young stated that "the moment the atonement of the Savior is done away, that moment, at one sweep, the hopes of salvation entertained by the Christian world are destroyed, the foundation of their faith is taken away, and there is nothing left for them to stand upon."15 Howard W. Hunter, of the Quorum of the Twelve, taught that "nothing is more important in the entire divine plan of salvation than the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. We believe that salvation comes because of the Atonement. In its absence the whole plan of creation would come to naught."16 Twenty-five years ago Elder Gordon B. Hinckley reminded the Saints that:

No member of this Church must ever forget the terrible price paid by our Redeemer who gave his life that all men might live—the agony of Gethsemane …[or] the cross, the instrument of his torture… This was the cross on which he hung and died on Golgotha's lonely summit. We cannot forget that. We must never forget it, for here our Savior, our Redeemer, the Son of God, gave himself a vicarious sacrifice for each of us.17

Elder John K. Carmack, in April 2001 General Conference, took it to a more personal level: "Christ's Atonement is the central doctrine, but of even more comfort and benefit has been how wonderfully accessible and individual His mercy and help have been to me personally."18 The significance of the atonement was also brought out by the first prophet of the restoration, Joseph Smith, who wrote regarding:

The condescension of the Father of our spirits, in providing a sacrifice for His creatures, a plan of redemption, a power of atonement, a scheme of salvation, having as its great objects, the bringing of men back into the presence of the King of heaven… The great plan of salvation is a theme which ought to occupy our strict attention, and be regarded as one of heaven's best gifts to mankind.19

Claim

• The authors begin by stating that "Mormon leaders have taught that this atoning sacrifice began in the Garden of Gethsemane."20 they then quote President Benson and Elder McConkie to the effect that the major portion of the atonement took place in the Garden.21 From this they conclude that one of the major themes of the LDS faith is that the atonement "took place primarily in the Garden"22

Response

• The authors claim that the atonement "took place primarily in the Garden" ought to lead one to conclude that it took place 'secondarily' somewhere else: perhaps the cross?
• Despite the ambiguity of these statements the authors rather strangely write that "if Mormons doubt that their church emphasizes the importance of Gethsemane today" they should consider a statement from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, which they then quote. Again, this statement indicates that it took place "primarily" in the Garden.23 Even though the two passages quoted from Elders Benson and McConkie are unequivocal about the significance of the Garden for the atonement, all the other LDS passages quoted by the authors are just the opposite: they are totally equivocal. And for good reason: the Latter-day Saint leaders, including the two they cite, do not in any way restrict the atoning sacrifice of our Savior to the Garden. But they definitely consider the atonement to have had its beginning there.
• The authors write that the Garden of Gethsemane is only mentioned twice in the scriptures, apparently to suggest that anything mentioned so infrequently must not be of much value. They need to realize that the concept that "the Word was made flesh" is mentioned only once; would they therefore reject its significance also?24 Is it insignificant that 'Calvary' occurs only at Luke 23.33, and that there is absolutely no warrant for it in the Greek?25 It is also significant, as Leon Morris has written, "to find that, apart from the crucifixion narrative [in the Gospels]…Paul is the only New Testament writer to speak about 'the cross.'"26 Furthermore, a recent addition to the literature about the cross in the New Testament points out that even in Paul it is not used frequently. His first two letters, the two to the Thessalonians, make no mention of the cross or the crucifixion. Nor do the last three letters make any reference to the cross (i.e., II Corinthians, Romans, and II Timothy).27 Murphy-O'Connor refers to nine "fragments of traditional teaching" which appear in Paul's letters. These help to determine "the common doctrinal base that Paul shared with the rest of the early church… Not a single one of these formulae that he inherited from his Christian environment mentions the crucifixion." Our source goes on to indicate that only two of them "formally state that he died." Therefore, in the others it must be inferred by the fact that He was resurrected from the dead.28
• For a detailed response, see: Jesus Christ/Atonement/Not carried out on the cross and Jesus Christ/Atonement/Not carried out on the cross/Quotes

Claim

• The authors are so determined to make Latter-day Saint writers look so 'un-Christian' that they quote those portions of LDS statements which contain the information they want their readers to know, but only that much. Such contextual selectivity is a form of bearing false witness. For instance, they quote the following from Lorenzo Snow, in 1893:

The time approached that He was to pass through the severest affliction that any mortal ever did pass through. He undoubtedly had seen persons nailed to the cross, because that method of execution was common at that time, and He understood the torture that such persons experienced for hours. He went by Himself in the garden and prayed to His Father, if it were possible, that this cup might pass from Him; and His feelings were such that He sweat great drops of blood, and in His agony there was an angel sent to give Him comfort and strength.32

Response

• This quotation is meant by the authors to indicate that the LDS teaching on the atonement is that it took place "primarily in the garden." What they fail to do, however, is read further into the talk given by Elder Snow. He stated in the same talk that "when Jesus went through that terrible torture on the cross, He saw what would be accomplished by it; He saw that His brethren and sisters—the sons and daughters of God—would be gathered in, with but few exceptions—those who committed the unpardonable sin. That sacrifice of the divine Being was effectual to destroy the powers of Satan."33 Clearly the cross was important in President Snow's soteriology.
• For a detailed response, see: Jesus Christ/Atonement/Not carried out on the cross

Claim

• The authors quote President Ezra Taft Benson to the effect that "it was in Gethsemane that Jesus took on Himself the sins of the world."

Response

• Had the authors but taken the time to seek out the entire article from which this statement is taken they would have noticed that Elder Benson continues by referring to "the glorious Atonement of our Lord which extended from Gethsemane to Golgotha."34
• Even without having sought out the original text, they could have determined the incorrect judgment they made of President Benson's position. They could have quoted from the same volume the quotation immediately preceding the one they cited: "In Gethsemane and on Calvary, He worked out the infinite and eternal atonement. It was the greatest single act of love in recorded history. Thus He became our Redeemer."35
• The atonement is clearly defined as having encompassed both the Garden and the cross. The cross is not in the least devalued or neglected. Had there been no death on the cross, whatever it was that happened in the Garden would have been superfluous. With the cross, the events in the Garden have meaning and significance.

Claim

• The authors quote Bruce R. McConkie: "it was in Gethsemane that 'he suffered the pain of all men… [and] took upon himself the sins of all men…"

Response

• What the authors fail to quote, from the same source and on the same page, is this:

In some way, incomprehensible to us, Gethsemane, the cross, and the empty tomb join into one grand and eternal drama, in the course of which Jesus abolishes death, and out of which comes immortality for all and eternal life for the righteous.36

• In point of fact, Elder McConkie writes in the same place regarding the darkness that surrounded the crucifixion: "Could it be that this was the period of his greatest trial, or that during it the agonies of Gethsemane recurred and even intensified?"37 Elsewhere Elder McConkie is very clear. In speaking to students at BYU he said: "We are saved because God sent his Son to shed his blood in Gethsemane and on Calvary that all through him might ransomed be. We are saved by the blood of Christ."38 As far back as 1948, in October General Conference of that year, Elder McConkie, then a Seventy, stated:

As I understand it, our mission to the world in this day, is to testify of Jesus Christ. Our mission is to bear record that he is the Son of the Living God and that he was crucified for the sins of the world; that salvation was, and is, and is to come, in and through his atoning blood… We believe that he came into the world with the express mission of dying upon the cross for the sins of the world; that he is, actually, literally, and really the Redeemer of the world and the Savior of men; and that by the shedding of his blood he has offered to all men forgiveness of sins conditioned upon their repentance and obedience to the gospel plan.39

In yet another place Elder McConkie wrote; "What then are the sacrifices of the true Christian? They are unending praise and thanksgiving to the Father who gave his Only Begotten Son as a ransom for our sins; they are everlasting praise to the Son for the merits and mercies and grace of his atoning sacrifice."40 In his article on "Atonement of Christ" in his Mormon Doctrine, a book that the authors claim to have read, Elder McConkie begins by quoting several scriptural passages. Some of these will be abridged here:41

• "This is the Gospel…that Jesus came into the world to be crucified for the world, and to bear the sins of the world."42
• "My Father sent me that I might be lifted up upon the cross."43
• "Behold [the Holy Messiah] offereth himself a sacrifice for sin."44
• "as in Adam, or by nature, they fall, even so the blood of Christ atoneth for their sins… There shall be no other name given nor any other way nor means whereby salvation can come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ… Salvation was, and is, and is to come, in and through the atoning blood of Christ."45

Claim

• The authors quote Elder Marion G. Romney that it was in the Garden of Gethsemane "that he suffered most."

Response

• What the authors fail to quote is the rest of the talk, wherein he states that "we cannot of ourselves, no matter how we may try, rid ourselves of the stain which is upon us as a result of our own transgressions. That stain must be washed away by the blood of the Redeemer."46
• Three years previously Elder Romney stated, "through repentance he may bring himself within the reach of the atoning blood of Jesus Christ, so that thereby he may be cleansed from the effects of his transgressions and obtain forgiveness of them."47

The Blood

Claim

• It is also clear from what the authors write elsewhere that they are unclear about the LDS attitude towards the blood shed by the Savior. In discussing "Christianity's definition of atonement" they quote from Leon Morris that "because Christ's blood was shed, all who believe in him have access into the very holiest of all."81 Later the authors point out "Hebrews 9.22 states that there is no remission of sins without the shedding (not sweating) of blood."82 The parenthetical comment in this last quotation is a referral back to the authors' comment that "the New Testament says nothing about this phenomenon [of 'sweating great drops of blood'] having any role in the atonement."83 Our authors then quote from several New Testament passages which refer to the fact that Christ died, or died on the cross, for us.84

Response

• It should be clear from the LDS references cited above that these Biblical passages also are all accepted by the Latter-day Saints. They believe that Jesus Christ died on the cross to redeem humankind. He shed His blood for us. Many of those earlier statements refer to the blood that was shed by Him. LDS apologist Michael Hickenbotham has written that "Latter-day Saints emphatically affirm our reliance on the atoning blood of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, as attested to in the Bible," and then refers to Colossians 1:14, 1 Peter 1:18–19, 1 John 1:7, and Revelation 7:14. He then refers to those references found in the Book of Mormon: 1 Nephi 12:10; Mosiah 3:7, 11, 4:2; Alma 5:21, 27, 21:9, 24:13, 34:36; Helaman 5:9; Ether 13:10; and Moroni 4:1; 5:2; 10:33; and in modern scripture: D&C 20:40; 27:2; 76:69; and Moses 6:62. He then continues:

Even the sacrament prayer for the administration of the water affirms the symbolism of the atoning blood. It states in part: "…bless and sanctify this water to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them."85

• King Benjamin in the Book of Mormon taught "salvation was, and is, and is to come, in and through the atoning blood of Christ."86 King Benjamin lived long before the Savior was born; sometimes this has led to criticisms from our enemies. Cullen Story of Princeton Theological Seminary, in a recent article on Justin Martyr, has referred to what he calls Justin's use of the "prophetic perfect." In his discussions with Trypho on the correct interpretation of Isaiah 53:7 Justin, according to Story,

wanted Trypho and his friends to understand that the prophetic Spirit could and did speak "as if the passion has already occurred" Sometimes, he explained, the prophetic Spirit "has spoken concerning the things that are going to occur, uttering them as if at that time they were occurring or even had occurred."87

• D&C 45:3–4 has the Lord speaking: "Listen to him who is the advocate with the Father, who is pleading your cause before him—saying: 'Father, behold the sufferings and death of him who did no sin, in whom thou wast well pleased; behold the blood of thy Son which was shed, the blood of him whom thou gavest that thy self might be glorified.'" There are many other statements regarding the shedding of Christ's blood, and its relationship to His redeeming sacrifice.
• For a detailed response, see: Jesus Christ/Atonement/Not carried out on the cross/Quotes All the these statements from scripture and prophets ought to convince even the most casual observer that the Latter-day Saints do indeed believe that the death of Jesus Christ on the cross was a major component of the redemption wrought by our Savior. It should also be evident that the shedding of His blood was an integral part of that atoning sacrifice.

Claim

• The authors claim that the LDS version of the atonement frees up everyone from the effects of Adam's transgression. That is, the Church teaches that all will be resurrected, without exception. The major portion of the chapter deals with the authors' rejection of the LDS suggestion that the atonement proper took place in the Garden of Gethsemane, as if to suggest that to the LDS His death on the cross itself was simply an afterthought.

Response

• There is more than sufficient material to demonstrate that the LDS position includes both the Garden and the cross.
• For a detailed response, see: Jesus Christ/Atonement and Jesus Christ/Atonement/Portrayed in Latter-day Saint hymns

Claim

• Near the end of their chapter on the atonement the authors suggest that the apparent overemphasis on the shedding of blood in the Garden rather than on the cross "no doubt is but one of several reasons why crosses cannot be found on LDS buildings. Certainly in the mind of the Latter-day Saint, the significance of the cross is not nearly as important as it is to the evangelical Christian."190

Response

• Whether the cross has any significance in the LDS faith has already been discussed; it does. That it has less importance for the LDS than for the evangelical Christian is simply not true. From the LDS perspective the empty tomb is a more fitting symbol of the Savior's atonement than is the Cross. We mean no disrespect towards those who choose otherwise; but we would like our position to be more faithfully reported by those who think we need their help. Latter-day Saints do not worship at the foot of the Cross; they worship at the feet of Christ. Jesus Christ is the Son of God, the Creator of the universe; He is the Lord and Redeemer of humankind; He is the Founder and Head of His Church; He is my Savior; I have accepted Him as such, and seek constantly to do His will, to do as He would have me do.
• For a detailed response, see: Jesus Christ/Atonement/Use of the cross

Endnotes

1 Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson, Mormonism 101. Examining the Religion of the Latter-day Saints (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 2000), 9, 12. Whether they distort or de-contextualize their quotations will be one of the items discussed in this paper.

2 Ibid., 9–11. Later, they write, "most Mormons believe in certain doctrines that they cannot fully understand" (page 57). One has to wonder just exactly what constitutes an "in-depth" study for these authors. As will be shown, they have completely taken out of context many statements, ignored so many others in the works they claim to have read, and in some cases actually ignored statements in the same talk or writings from which they have quoted. Did they not read the entire talk? Did they really believe their readers were so naïve that they would not accept their invitation to check out their sources to determine exactly what LDS leaders said?

3 Ibid., 10, quotation from 11. There are so many problems with this statement one hardly knows where to begin. Many observers have stated that the Book of Mormon teaches orthodox mainstream Christology, not something radical. (Indeed, that is one of the issues pointed out frequently: that what is taught in the Book of Mormon has been changed or ignored or contradicted by later LDS thought.) Eighty years ago Reverend John D. Nutting wrote that the Book of Mormon taught "just what the whole Christian world has found in the Bible for 1900 years." So did the Doctrine and Covenants, up to a certain point, after which "the doctrine is contradictory" [John D. Nutting, Light on Mormonism 1.1 (April–June 1922), 6]; cf. page 4; at 62: "these great truths which were formerly held even by Mormonism itself!" (italics in original); at 71: "the doctrine of God in the Book of Mormon is the correct Bible one"; at 79: "The teachings of Mormonism about the Holy Spirit are closer to those of the Bible." Nutting was a Pastor in Salt Lake City from 1892–1898, and later Secretary of the Utah Gospel Mission of Cleveland. In point of fact, because he saw nothing radical about it, Joseph Smith was so excited about his First Vision experience that he immediately sought out his minister to discuss it with him. It was not until the Christian world at large began persecuting them for claiming to see angels, and receiving visions from God (i.e., to act and think like New Testament Christians), that the LDS began to withdraw from their society.

4 Indeed, McKeever and Johnson quote current LDS President Gordon B. Hinckley on page 41 admitting the differences that exist between The Church of Jesus Christ and other Christian denominations. In the footnote to that statement they quote him again: "We acknowledge without hesitation that there are differences between us /and other faiths/. Were this not so there would have been no need for a restoration of the gospel," 288, note 3, quoting Ensign (May 1998), 4. There is certainly nothing in this statement indicating that Hinckley, or the Church in general, is attempting to make themselves look "more Christian, or orthodox" as McKeever and Johnson are suggesting is the case. All that the Church leaders have ever demanded is that our teachings be presented honestly and correctly; if they are then we are clearly seen to be Christian.

5 Ibid., 12. On the reference to 'bearing false witness against others,' see Richard Mouw, "Can a real Mormon believe in Jesus?," Book and Culture: a Christian Review 3 (1997), 11–13, at page 13, where he concludes that evangelicals must cease bearing false witness against their Christian neighbors. In an ecumenical conference held at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota, in June 1999, Mouw, the President of Fuller Theological Seminary, made the same statement with reference to the other traditions represented there: the Lutherans, Catholics, Anglicans, Methodists, and Orthodox (and, in the audience, one Latter-day Saint). Dr. Mouw has once again made the same comment in his Foreword to the recently published book, The New Mormon Challenge. Responding to the Latest Defenses of a Fast-Growing Movement, edited by Francis J. Beckwith, Carl Moser, and Paul Owen (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing, 2002), 11. Mouw writes: "As an evangelical I must confess that I am ashamed of our record in relating to the Mormon community. To be sure, there are deep differences between our worldviews… But none of those disagreements give me or any other evangelical the license to propagate distorted accounts of what Mormons believe. By bearing false witness against our LDS neighbors, we evangelicals have often sinned not just against Mormons but against the God who calls us to be truth-tellers." McKeever and Johnson need to take that last statement seriously to heart.

6 Ibid., 12. In 1949 David O. Mckay, then of the Quorum of the Twelve, stated in General Conference that the missionaries' "message is that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, the redeemer and Savior of mankind." Conference Report (October 1949), 120.

7 Conference Report (April 1902), 67, in Roy Doxey, The Latter-day Prophets and the Doctrine and Covenants, 4 volumes (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1963), 3:35.

8 3 Nephi 27:13–4.

9 Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Vol. 3 (Salt Lake City, Utah; Deseret Book Company, 1980) : .30 The passage is quoted frequently: Richard R. Hopkins, Biblical Mormonism. Responding to Evangelical Criticism of LDS Theology (Bountiful, Utah: Horizon Publishers, 1994), 123; Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, edited by Joseph Fielding Smith (Salt Lake City; Deseret Book Company, 1976), 121.; The Teachings of Joseph Smith, edited by Larry E. Dahl and Donald Q. Cannon (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1997), 55; Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, Second Edition (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966), 60.; also in M. Gerald Bradford and Larry E. Dahl, "Doctrine: Meaning, Source, and History of Doctrine," Encyclopedia of Mormonism, edited by Daniel H. Ludlow (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1992), 1:393–397; Tad Callister, The Infinite Atonement (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 2000), 3–4; Keith W. Perkins, "Insights into the Atonement from Latter-day Scriptures," Principles of the Gospel in Practice. Sperry Symposium 1985 (Salt Lake City, Utah;: Randall Book Company, 1985), 91; Bruce R. McConkie, Conference Report (April 1950), 130; quoted in Richard G. Grant, Understanding these Other Christians. An LDS Introduction to Evangelical Christianity (self-published, 1998): 42; My Errand from the Lord. A personal study guide for Melchizedek Priesthood Quorums 1976-1977 (Salt Lake City: Corporation of the President, 1976), 92. The statement was first published in an early LDS publication, the Elders' Journal I (1832): 28–9. The frequency of appearance of this quotation in LDS literature makes one wonder why it is not to be found in Mormonism 101; indeed, McKeever and Johnson claim to have read the first six references cited here.

10 B.H. Roberts, The Seventy's Course in Theology, Fourth Year (1911): The Atonement (Orem, Utah: Grandin Book Company, 1994), iv–v. This is a reprint edition of this book, first published by Deseret News Press, 1907–1912.

11 Joseph F. Smith, "Principles of Government in the Church" (September 13, 1917), Messages of the First Presidency, Vol. 5, edited by James R. Clark (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1971), 83; first published Improvement Era 21 (November 1917), 3–11.

12 Heber J. Grant, Gospel Standards (Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, 1969, 1941), 24. McKeever and Johnson claim to have read this volume. The statement cited is also quoted in a student manual: Doctrines of the Gospel (Salt Lake City: Corporation of the President of the Church, 1986), 9.

13 Grant, Gospel Standards, 6, citing Deseret News Church Section, September 3, 1938, 7.

14 Bruce R. McConkie, Conference Report (April 1985), 11, quoted in Callister, The Infinite Atonement, 17; also, Robert Millet, "Foreword" to Callister, The Infinite Atonement, x.

15 Brigham Young, "Character and Condition of the Latter-day Saints, Etc.," Journal of Discourses, reported by David W. Evans 8 May 1870, Vol. 14 (London: Latter-Day Saint's Book Depot, 1872), 41, quoted in Callister, The Infinite Atonement, 9.

16 Howard W. Hunter, The Teachings of Howard W. Hunter, edited by Clyde J. Williams (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1997), 7; in Latter-day Commentary on the Old Testament, edited by Ed J. Pinegar and Richard J. Allen (American Fork, Utah: Covenant Communications, Inc., 2001), 385.

17 Ensign (May 1975), 93; cited in Gordon B. Hinckley, Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1997), 26–27.

18 Ensign (May 2001), 77.

19 Joseph Smith, History of the Church 2:5–6, 23; cited in The Teachings of Joseph Smith, 481–482. McKeever and Johnson claim to have read both of these volumes.

20 McKeever and Johnson, Mormonism 101, 140.

21 Ibid., 141.

22 Ibid., 148.

23 Ibid., 141–2.

24 The argument is used by Nicholas Lossky, "Theology and Prayer. An Orthodox Perspective," Ecumenical Theology in Worship, Doctrine, and Life: Essays Presented to Geoffrey Wainwright on his Sixtieth Birthday, edited by David S. Cunningham, Ralph Del Colle, and Lucas Lamadrid (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 24–32. On pages 28–29 Lossky uses the argument as a defense for deification against those who state that the singularity of 2 Peter 1:4 as a scriptural basis for deification is not acceptable.

25 'Calvary' is taken from the Latin version and passed into all English translations, until recently. See Alfred Plummer, The Gospel According to St. Luke, International Critical Commentary (New York: Scribner's, 1902), 530–531. Cf. "Calvary," LDS Bible Dictionary (Salt Lake City: Corporation of the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1979), 629.

26 Leon Morris, The Cross in the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1999), 216–217. Leon Morris is referred to by McKeever and Johnson as a "Christian theologian" and is quoted frequently throughout Mormonism 101. Morris is an Australian Anglican.

27 Jerome Murphy-O'Connor, "'Even Death On a Cross:' Crucifixion in the Pauline Letters," The Cross in Christian Tradition: from Paul to Bonaventure, edited by Elizabeth A. Dreyer (Mahwah, New Jersey: Paulist Press, 2000), 21–50. Murphy-O'Connor, a Catholic, agrees with what Morris said: "If we leave aside the gospels, 'cross' and 'crucify' are Pauline terms." Page 23 includes a chart of Pauline uses in various letters. In fact he indicates that were it not for Paul, the Gospels probably would not have indicated the manner of Christ's death (page 22).

28 Ibid., 24. Clearly, the emphasis in the early church was not on the death of Christ, but on His resurrection; not on the cross, but on the empty tomb. The nine passages are: 1 Thessalonians 1:9–10; Galatians 1:3–4; 1 Corinthians 15:3–5; Romans 1:3–4, 4:24–25, 10:9; also the eucharistic words in 1 Corinthians 11:23–25, and two liturgical hymns: Philemon 2:6–11 and Colossians 1:15–20. Indeed, with reference to Philemon 2:6–11, a leading study refers to "the noticeable absence of those themes which we associate with Paul's Christology and soteriology, e.g., the doctrine of redemption through the Cross, the Resurrection of Christ and the place of the Church," [Ralph P. Martin, A Hymn of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 in Recent Interpretation and in the Setting of Early Christian Worship (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1997), 49.] It will be observed that verse 8 reads "became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." Martin continues the above quotation: "Although it is on the Cross that the Lord of glory brings His life of obedience to a climax, no redemptive significance is attached to that death /in this verse/. Indeed, as was noted earlier, the Cross may not be mentioned in the original version of the hymn." Martin claims the reference is Pauline, that is, it was inserted by Paul into the original hymn, which did not include the reference to the Cross. Hans Urs von Balthasar agrees with this assessment: that the reference to the Cross was added by Paul to a pre-existing hymn. [Hans Urs von Balthasar, Mysterium Paschale (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2000), 23.]

32 McKeever and Johnson, Mormonism 101, 142, quoting Collected Discourses (1892-1893), Vol. 3, edited by Brian H. Stuy (City Unknown: B.H.S. Publishing, 1989), 362.

33 Collected Discourses (1892-1893), Vol. 3, 364–365.

34 McKeever and Johnson, 140-141, citing The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, 14; at that location it is being quoted from Ezra Taft Benson, Come Unto Christ (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1983), , 6–7. McKeever and Johnson could certainly have located this volume had they chosen to be thorough. The paper in its entirety has just been reprinted in Ensign (December 2001), 8–15. In this article President Benson gives five marks of the divinity of Jesus Christ. Those marks are: His divine birth; His ministry; His "great Atoning Sacrifice;" His "literal Resurrection;" and His promised second coming. The article was also published in Ensign (April 1997), which McKeever and Johnson read—see Mormonism 101, page 43, note 12.

35 McKeever and Johnson, Mormonism 101, 140–141, quoting The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, 14. This comment is from the same original source as the quotation above: Benson, Come Unto Christ, 6–7. It is part of the paper published in Ensign (December 2001): 8–15. The next quotation is also from page 14. McKeever and Johnson claim to have read this volume of President Bensons' sermons and writings.

36 McKeever and Johnson, Mormonism 101, 141, quoting Bruce R. McConkie, The Mortal Messiah (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1987), 127–128, 224. My quotation is from page 224. Again, McKeever and Johnson claim to have read this volume.

37 McConkie, The Mortal Messiah, 225, quoted in Callister, The Infinite Atonement, 135. Later, Elder McConkie wrote, "that all of the anguish, all of the sorrow, and all of the suffering of Gethsemane recurred during the final three hours on the cross, the hours when darkness covered the land." (McConkie, The Mortal Messiah, 232, note 22, quoted in Callister, The Infinite Atonement, 134–135.) Elsewhere Elder McConkie wrote, "Again, on Calvary, during the last three hours of his mortal passion, the sufferings of Gethsemane returned, and he drank to the full the cup which his Heavenly Father had given him." [Bruce R. McConkie, "The Seven Christs," Ensign (November 1982), 33, quoted in Callister, The Infinite Atonement, 134–135.]

38 Bruce R. McConkie, "What Think ye of Salvation by Grace?", Brigham Young University 1983–1984 Fireside and Devotional Speeches (Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Publications, 1984), 48, quoted in Robert Millet and Joseph Fielding McConkie, In His Holy Name (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1988), 90–91. In fact, in the words just prior to those quoted, Elder McConkie addressed another topic: If "there is no atonement of Christ, what then? Can we be saved? Will all our good works save us? Will we be rewarded for all our righteousness? Most assuredly we will not. We are not saved by works alone, no matter how good; we are saved because God sent his son…" (Ibid., 90).

39 Bruce R. McConkie, Conference Report (October 1, 1948), 23, 25. Two years previously Elder Spencer W. Kimball, of the Quorum of Twelve, had testified that the Savior "must die for the sins of the world… They crucified him, the Son of God, on Calvary." [Conference Report (April 1946), 45]

40 Bruce R. McConkie, Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, Vol. 3 (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1973), 242, quoted in Latter-day Commentary, 138–139.

41 McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 60–61. How could McKeever and Johnson fail to have seen these verses quoted by Brother McConkie, considering the emphasis they place on what they claim as his false teachings about Gethsemane? How also could they miss the fact that Gethsemane is not mentioned once in this article? Nor is there mention of Gethsemane in his articles on Redemption, Mediator, Reconciliation, or Salvation.

42 D&C 76:40–2.

43 3 Nephi 27:14.

44 2 Nephi 2:6–9.

45 Mosiah 3:16–9.

46 McKeever and Johnson, Mormonism 101, 147, quoting Conference Report (October 1953), 35; the remainder, from page 36, is quoted from Doxey, The Latter-day Prophets and the Doctrine and Covenants, 2:81–83.

47 Conference Report (April 1950), 84.

79 Vaughn J. Featherstone, Man of Holiness (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1998), 51–52.

80 McKeever and Johnson, Mormonism 101, 10.

81 Ibid., 144, quoting Leon Morris, The Atonement (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1983), 84.

82 McKeever and Johnson, Mormonism 101, 145, with a clear reference to the Garden of Gethsemane incident as the primary source of LDS doctrine. This has been refuted in the passages already quoted from scripture and LDS leaders.

83 Ibid., 142

84 1 Corinthians 15:3; Colossians 2:13–4; Romans 5:8, 10; Galatians 6:14; Hebrews 10:10; Ephesians 2:16; Colossians 1:20.

85 Michael Hickenbotham, Answering Challenging Mormon Questions (Bountiful, Utah: Horizon Publishers, 1995), 131. This is a volume that should have been noticed by McKeever and Johnson; it puts the lie to much of their work. A book that McKeever and Johnson claim to have read contains much of the same material: Richard R. Hopkins, Biblical Mormonism, 184–188. Both Hickenbotham and Hopkins are dealing primarily with the Eucharist, or sacrament of the Lord's Supper. Elder Marion G. Romney, of the Quorum of Twelve, said in General Conference that "the water is to be drunk in remembrance of his blood which was shed for us." [Conference Report (April 1946), 39.]

86 Mosiah 3:18.

87 Cullen I.K. Story, "The Cross as Ultimate in the Writings of Justin Martyr," Ultimate Reality and Meaning: Interdisciplinary Studies in the Philosophy of Understanding 21 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1998), 25, citing Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, 114.2.

108 Pliny (ca. 115 AD), epistle 10:96, in Pliny. Letters, Vol. 2, translated by William Melmoth, Loeb Classical Library (Boston: Harvard University Press, 1958), 403. Pliny's letter to the Emperor Trajan can be found online at http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/texts/pliny.html. See now, Margaret Daly-Denton, "Singing Hymns to Christ as to a God (cf. Pliny Ep. X, 96)," The Jewish Roots of Christological Monotheism, edited by Corey C. Newman, James R. Davila, and Gladys S. Lewis (Leiden, Netherlands: E.J. Brill, 1999), 277–292. She points out that there are two types of hymns in the New Testament: hymnic and liturgical. The liturgical hymns are about Christ, not to him.