|
Correspondence with Ron Rhodes of
"Reasoning from the Scriptures Ministries"
Asst. Prof. of Geology, Barry
Bickmore has given us permission to post the following
correspondence on SHIELDS. This
correspondence is also found on his web site.
Prof. Bickmore introduces the correspondence:
After reading Ron Rhodes’ chapter on "Christ and the Trinity" in The Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism, I was amazed by how badly he botched his description of
the LDS doctrine of the Atonement. I wondered how he came up with it, and so I asked him in an e-mail.
The following is the conversation that ensued. He has yet to respond to my last letter. – Barry Bickmore
Letter 1
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999
To: Ron Rhodes
From: "Barry R. Bickmore"
Subject: Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism
Dear Mr. Rhodes,
I am a Mormon, and I just finished reading your chapter on Christ and the Trinity in "The Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism".
I thought you made several good points, but your section on "The Atonement of Jesus Christ" really made me wonder.
If I read you right, you seem to have been saying that Latter-day Saints believe
the Atonement frees mankind only from physical death and original guilt, but not from personal sins.
Where on earth did you get that idea? Did you read Robinson's explanation of LDS soteriology in "How Wide the Divide?", the book you were supposed to be responding to?
Did you even read any of the LDS sources you cite in support of your point?
Let me illustrate. You cite the LDS manual, "Gospel Principles", saying that Jesus "became our savior and he did his part to help us return to our heavenly home.
It is now up to each of us to do our part and to become worthy of exaltation."
Is this a complete explanation of our view of the Atonement? Why not take a look at
chapter 12, "The Atonement", which has such section headings as "Christ Was the
Only One Who Could Atone for Our Sins", "Christ Suffered and Died to Atone
for Us", and "The Atonement Makes it Possible for Those Who Repent to be Saved From Their Sins".
Did you bother looking any of that up? I recognize that you likely disagree with us about how much "works" come into play, but that still doesn't change the fact that we don't believe any of us can be saved from the weight of
our personal sins without the Atonement of Jesus Christ.
If I'm missing something here, please let me know. I am really
anxious to know whether you can possibly defend what you wrote, as this experience has left me with
a very negative view of your character.
Sincerely,
Barry Bickmore |
Letter 2
Date: 28 Jul 1999
From: Ron Rhodes
Subject: Re: Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism
To: "Barry R. Bickmore"
Of course I read Robinson's book and the other sources mentioned in our book.
Having read many Mormon resources, I believe that what is in our book is an
accurate representation and summary of Mormon belief on the atonement.
Does that mean I believe what I wrote was exhaustive? No!
But within the confines of a short chapter, I believe the Mormon view is reflected rightly.
I even had a number of other highly respected scholars who have studied Mormon doctrine go through
that chapter to make sure it was accurate.
You can challenge my character all you want. But the reality is that I went the extra mile to make sure of accuracy.
RR |
Letter 3
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999
To: Ron Rhodes
From: "Barry R. Bickmore"
Subject: Re: Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism
Dear Mr. Rhodes
Well, if that's the way you see it. However, I'm curious about who
these "other highly respected scholars" are who agree with your view of LDS
soteriology. I can't believe there would be that many people, who have studied Mormon doctrine, who would come to such a conclusion.
Would you mind telling me who your reviewers were?
Sincerely,
Barry Bickmore |
Letter 4
Date: 28 Jul 1999
From: Ron Rhodes
Subject: Re: Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism
To: "Barry R. Bickmore"
Greetings again:
I don't have their permission to hand out their names. I will tell you that they are University and Seminary professors who are published
authors and who are highly respected in their field. In fact, some of them have more than one doctorate.
I would encourage you to reconsider your commitment to Mormonism.
Even if you hold a low view of me and what I wrote, at least continue to examine the hard,
unarguable facts for yourself. Even if you agree with just a small portion of what is written in our book, that alone should give you cause for concern.
RR |
Letter 5
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999
To: Ron Rhodes
From: "Barry R. Bickmore"
Subject: Re: Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism
Dear Mr. Rhodes,
Your comment about the credentials of your reviewers makes me wonder if one of them might be "Dr. Dr." Weldon.
In any case, back to the original point. Please read the following passages from the Book of Mormon and D&C, and then tell me whether you still think you were being completely accurate when you supposedly
contrasted LDS doctrine with Biblical teaching by saying, "Scripture portrays the death of Christ as dealing with the sins of all humanity, not merely the transgression
of Adam." (p. 135)
2 Nephi 25:23
Omni 1:26
Mosiah 3:11; 13:28; 16:13
Alma 22:14; 24:13; 33:22; 34:8, 10-12; 36:17; 42:15
Moroni 7:26, 38; 10:26
D&C 3:20; 18:22-23; 20:29; 29:1
Articles of Faith 3-4 (which must be read together, since 4 explains what 3 means by "laws and ordinances")
I don't particularly care whether you choose to argue against my faith, or whether you think the case against my faith is "unarguable".
I was simply shocked by your erroneous interpretation of LDS
soteriology, and I wanted to find out how such a mistake could be made.
I also wanted to ascertain if, when given undeniable evidence to the contrary (chapter 12 of "Gospel Principles" and the foregoing list of scriptural passages), you would modify your position.
Even the newest convert to Mormonism would be aware that your interpretation is flatly wrong, and I find it odd that you would wish to damage your reputation - and potential
impact - on your target audience, by asserting something that is so easily proven false.
Sincerely,
Barry Bickmore |
Letter 6
Date: 28 Jul 1999
From: Ron Rhodes
Subject: Re:Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism
To: "Barry R. Bickmore"
No, one of the reviewers was not a "Dr. Dr." Weldon, whoever that is.
But I will tell you that one of these scholars is a former Mormon himself (a Mormon for a
number of decades).
I don't think it is necessary for you to engage in any form of ad hominem attacks -- either against me (you ARE questioning my character, are you not?), or those
who reviewed what I have written.
I am aware of the verses you mention. But those verses, understood within the BROADER context of Mormon theology, do not change the fact that in Mormonism
Christ's death "saves" people only in the general sense that everyone will be raised from the dead.
But this atonement is not one that INDIVIDUALLY saves a person to the full, for man must save himself by a life of good works.
Certainly I think there are plenty of statements by Mormon leaders to the effect that Christ's atonement did not cover all sins.
For example, Joseph Fielding Smith wrote: "Joseph Smith taught that there were certain sins so grievous that man may commit, that they will place the transgressors beyond the power of the atonement
of Christ. If these offenses are committed, then the blood of Christ will not cleanse them from their sins even though they repent....Man may commit certain grievous
sins that will place him beyond the reach of the atoning blood of Christ.
If then he would be saved he must make sacrifice of his own life to atone -- so far as in his
power lies -- for that sin, for the blood of Christ alone under certain circumstances will not avail" (Doctrines of Salvation, I, 134-135).
There are plenty other statements from Mormon leaders just like this.
So, no, I do not think it is the consistent teaching of Mormons that Christ's atonement covers
all sins, and there are definite statements by Mormon leaders to that effect.
RR |
Letter 7
|
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999
To: Ron Rhodes
From: "Barry R. Bickmore"
Subject: Re:Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism Cc:
Dear Mr. Rhodes,
As I explicitly stated from the outset, I AM questioning your character.
But this is no "ad hominem attack" - I am specifically challenging one of your arguments.
I simply cannot imagine how an honest and competent person could put forward such an assertion, and so I seek clarification from you.
Thank you for at least attempting to clarify your position for me in your last note.
However, I still don't understand your logic. You quote Joseph Fielding Smith saying that certain sins cannot be repented of, but then, both Jesus and Paul said the
same thing (see Matt. 12:31; Mark 3:29; Luke 12:10; Heb. 10:26). Now, the Bible never says what exactly constitutes the "blasphemy against the Holy Ghost"
referred to in these passages, but Joseph Smith did provide explicit definitions.
Those who commit such sins can never be completely forgiven, as Jesus and Paul
intimated, but must take responsibility for those sins upon themselves.
And even if the Bible didn't have clear statements that there exists an "unpardonable sin", what on earth does this have to do with the question of whether the LDS
teach the Atonement ONLY absolves people of the effects of the Fall?
Let me rephrase my question. Do you believe that the LDS teach we can be absolved of our
personal sins and be exalted apart from the Atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ?
You seem to be saying that because we include good works in the formula for salvation, that negates the role of the Atonement with respect to personal sins.
Don't you believe that faith is required for one to be absolved of personal sin?
Does the fact that one has to exert some sort of mental effort to be forgiven of sins mean that
the Atonement of Christ makes that forgiveness possible in the first place?
LDS see good works as an essential product of real faith, so I don't understand the
distinction you are trying to make.
I don't need a lecture on your version of the faith/grace/works debate - I've heard it all before.
I just want you to tell me if you claim we believe the Atonement is not effective in any way for the forgiveness of personal sins.
Sincerely,
Barry Bickmore
|
|
