I am in total agreement with this comment, particularly this part:

“What we should be doing, as I argue, is developing our own theological resources, using our own scripture, our own prophetic tradition to get at these issues in a distinctly Mormon way, rather than leaning on Calvin for our atonement theory.”

I think we too often try to harmonize our theology with other Christian theologies. Because our theology is (at least somewhat) relatively unsystematic it is consequently difficult to pin down what exactly “Mormon theology” is. It would probably be more descriptive to say “Mormon theologies” (For example, the theology I discuss with fellow members of my ward and the more philosophical theology I discuss with fellow LDS students at the school of theology I attend is quite distinct. This may not be a good thing but it is the case). As a corollary to this point, it’s also true that in dialogue with other theologies we often talk past one another because we mean different things when discussing apparently similar concepts. Besides, the uniquely “Mormon” theological resources available to us are, in my opinion, inexhaustibly profound, and we risk not having mined the valuable ore that is there when we singularly insist on viewing our religion through an orthodox Christian lens.

Matt discusses Blake Ostler’s attempt to do the above in formulating a uniquely Mormon theory of Atonement, but Blake is not the only one to have done this. Eugene England, W. Cleon Skousen, and more recently Kevin Clawson and Jacob Morgan have all formulated novel theories of Atonement using mostly LDS theological resources to do so. I am writing my Master’s thesis on contemporary Mormon atonement theory and it is fascinating both reading what is out there and discovering how little has been done with so much potential theological ore available.

I remember President Hinckley saying at conference that he worships Jesus.

But over 20 years ago, Bruce R. McConkie said we don’t worship Jesus. He said we worship the Father, in the name of Jesus, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

But I think the gist of the Trinity versus Godhead debate is still mainly semantics. President Hinckley has shown that we don’t have to get hung up on which member of the Godhead we are talking about.

I believe that Mormon doctrine is actually closer to evangelical/pentecostal doctrine than any other branches of Christianity.

Evangelicals believe in spiritual gifts and walking with the Holy Spirit as a close and personal influence in our daily lives. So do we. (They may get some of the technicalities wrong, but I’ll grant that many of them are sincere.)

But the blander denominations of Christianity, at least most Protestants, don’t believe in spiritual gifts, and don’t believe in personal revelation.

Mainstream protestants seem to have taken the power and miraculousness out of Christianity. They’ve watered it down. They say miracles have ceased. They don’t believe in walking with the Spirit.

Some Christians (of both Protestant and Catholic varieity) have also turned the Savior into a “wimp.”

I don’t believe in a “wimpy” Jesus. He is tender and loving. But he is not the namby-pamby wimp or doormat that many Christians have made him out to be.

So, in a way, I would like to concur that Mormons are not Christian by the definition that mainstream watered-down Protestants use. I don’t want to be a part of that kind of Christianity that denies the possibility of true Godly power and influence in our lives, as plainly described in the Bible.

And I don’t want to believe in their “wimpified” Jesus, either.

So in essence, the mainstream Christians do have two points. We’re not Christian according to their definition. And we don’t believe in their version of who Jesus is.

I think the differences are much more basic and are actually much simpler, than the philosophies of the various “creeds” and the nature or substance of God’s being.

What really surprises me is that the Evangelicals/Pentecostals don’t realize how very CLOSE we are to them! Because they (the E/P’s) also denounce the mainstream protestants as cold, un-spiritual, watered-down, and wimpified.

One of my favorite talks of all time is Jeffrey Holland’s “The grandeur of God”. The Gist of it is that in order for Jesus to be perfect, he has to be like God in Character and attributes. This means that what you see as good about Christ is also good about God.

The relationship is different, I agree. Jesus has walked the Earth and “done the work” here, so to speak. This is important in that we do all things in His name, but he has only done the Father’s will, which means we worship the Father. I don’t think you have to dismiss any closer feelings for your Savior so you can worship the Father, as there are different roles played by each member of the Godhead. It is important to me that I know God’s role and love and respect Him for everything he does, because if Jesus is that nice and caring, God is as well.

I hope that helps.

Nasamomdele – I agree that all this means we should develop a more serious Mormon theology, one that relies upon our own definitions and concepts.

Jon – I think you’re eexpressing sentiments that most Mormons have. Thanks.

Now, it’s almost wrong to pray to Jesus, as I understand it. We pray to God. I can’t internalize that, “in His name”–I need to speak to the Savior because I truly believe He loves and understands me and my experience. But there isn’t a way within our teachings to do that.

And God isn’t as nice or caring.

So, yes, we are Christians, but Jesus is a more distant figure, like a loving uncle, rather than an immediately available shoulder to cry on. And God don’t want to hear no whining.

I’m not being facetious. It’s a true dilemma that I face. I can’t be the only one.

not to threadjack, but I don’t think not worshiping Jesus has anything to do with Adam-God. There is nothing about Adam-God as taught by Brigham that suggests we shouldn’t worship Jesus.

Personally I think he 4th and 5th century Christians were too caught up in the idea that Christianity had to be monotheistic in nature. thus they did flips to fit Jesus into the idea of being monothesists.

Personally I do not think of Mormonism as Monotheistic. It is monoprimacy. One God which is worshipped.

I do not think Jesus is co-eternal in the Godhead, any more than I see the Godhead as eternal in that sense. How could he be if at one point he was an intelligence rather than an organized spirit.

As well Father has not been co-eternally in the God Head because he also was, if I am to understand Joseph Smith’s doctrine taught in the King Foliett sermon, an intelligence who organized by his father into a spirit.

It is just not that simple. In any aspect.

Very Interesting Post. I spent my 2 years in Russia among either staunch Russian Orthodox or staunch atheists. I actually never once was accused of worshiping a “different jesus” until I ran into some 7th Day Adventists.

Is it time for a clear separation of the Mormon semantics for the atonement from others’. I love the idea of strictly adhering to scriptural definitions, however I fear the burning of bridges that can be caused by a militant us/them stance as well as the “sifting” caused by taking away our precious Mormon colloquialisms. Next thing that leaves our dumbing-down speech is “tender mercies”.

Talmage wrote a thought-provoking story about a lamp salesman who sold him a new lamp, not by showing him the lack of Talmage’s lamp, but rather complementing Talmage’s and offering to show him a better lamp. When Talmage saw the better lamp, he immediately bought it. I love the transfer to our mission of the church. Is our mission to establish just how different we are or how we are in the same business, but better.

As for the relationship with Christ question, I’ve never heard that we worship Christ. We don’t pray to him. However, I think of the experience of Alma the Younger, calling upon the name of Christ for redemption. Christ said that he came to show us the Father. Joseph Smith always preached knowing God, but our Articles of Faith say we need to have Faith in the Lord, Jesus Christ. This is turning into a little paradox in my mind. For my two cents, we worship God the Father as the Great God, author of the plan, and worship Christ in terms of the atonement, as our father in salvation, understanding that he does nothing, save the Father commands.