Kyle Beshears returns to Gospel Tangents, and we’re going to cover some difficult topics. Are Mormons Christian? How does he justify his answer? I think you’ll be surprised by his answer. Check out our conversation…
transcript to follow
Copyright © 2023
Gospel Tangents
All Rights Reserved
Except for book reviews, no content may be reproduced without written permission
Are Mormons Christian? Baptist Pastor Answers!
Kyle Beshears returns to Gospel Tangents, and we’re going to cover some difficult topics. Does he think Mormons are Christians? How does he justify his answer? I think you’ll be surprised by his answer. Check out our conversation…
Interview
GT 00:35 Welcome to Gospel Tangents. I’m excited to have my favorite Baptist pastor back on the show. Could you go ahead and tell us who you are?
Kyle 00:44 My name is Kyle Beshears, and I’m a Baptist pastor from Mobile, Alabama, and very grateful and happy to be back with you on Gospel Tangents.
GT 00:53 All right. Last time we met, we were in Florida. Where are we today?
Kyle 00:56 We are in Utah, freezing cold, snowy Utah.
GT 01:04 And why are you in Utah?
Kyle 01:05 Yes. I am leading a group of college students, who are evangelicals, on inter-religious dialogues with Latter-day Saint students up and down the valley.
GT 01:16 And that’s pretty cool. Because you know, we talked a little bit about this last time, but I’d like to go into more detail. A lot of times, evangelicals and Mormons bash a lot. And so, this is something where you’re purposely not bashing, right?
Kyle 01:29 That’s correct.
GT 01:30 So tell us about your tour. I know you’ve been to a few different college campuses. And tell us more about that.
Kyle 01:35 So this is actually the seventh or eighth year that we’ve done this trip. And we work with an organization called Standing Together, which is run by Greg and Jill Johnson, and they coordinate with the Church to set up dialogues with LDS students at the Institutes. So, we don’t really know where we’re going until a few weeks before we get here. But this year, it happens to be UVU (Utah Valley University,) BYU (Brigham Young University), and the University of Utah. In years past, we’ve done Utah State, we’ve done Weber State, and we’ve done private dialogues, as well, in people’s homes.
GT 02:17 So, this is interesting to me to hear that you’re actually talking to the students, not just the instructors.
Kyle 02:23 That’s correct, yeah. So, typically what will happen is the students will get paired with students. We try to do like three to three, four to four or something like that. And then, as a leader, we’ll have sidebar conversations. And those actually end up being really fruitful dialogues in and of themselves.
GT 02:40 Yeah. I went to Weber State and the University of Utah, I’m both a Wildcat and a Ute. And I just can’t imagine [doing these dialogues.] I attended Institute when I was in college. It’s so strange to me to hear that you’re having students talking to students. Because sometimes Mormons can be controlling. Do we really trust our students? And so how and why did this all get started?
Kyle 03:11 How did this Evangelical/LDS interaction get started? Well, that started in the 1830s.
GT 03:19 {Chuckling} But it wasn’t so kind.
Kyle 03:23 But it wasn’t so kind. And so, we have centuries, and generations of conflict and turmoil, and between our two tribes, our two peoples. And about 20 years or so ago, a select few folks said, “You know what? What if we did something different? What if we engaged each other in respectful dialogue?” And that ended up being led by Richard Mouw who was the president of Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California, and then Bob Millet, who was a professor at BYU. I think, maybe he was the dean of the Religious Studies Department.
GT 04:07 That sounds right.
Kyle 04:07 And those two developed a really close relationship. A lot of those early dialogues involved doctrinal differences, those types of things. But, after a while, students started saying, “Well, why can’t we do that? Maybe bring it down to us lay folks.” And so, our students started getting involved in it, like I said, coming on 10 years or so ago, right as student dialogue version of what was happening at an academic level was blossoming. And, yes, there can be contention in those dialogues. But we try as hard as we can not to allow that to ruin what we’re trying to do. One of the things that we tell our students–so we’re very picky about who we bring. One of the things we tell our students is that the object of these conversations is going to be Christ. And the subject of the conversation is going to be the person sitting across the table from you. And what we mean by that is Christ must be glorified in these conversations. And you must be getting to know your neighbors so that you can love them as you love yourself, in obedience to the greatest commandment. And as long as you’re sold on that vision, we’re good to go. You need to bring what Rich Mouw calls convicted civility about differences. But you also need to bring healthy curiosity to know really, what do you believe? I’ve heard this about you. There’s no wrong question. There’s just a wrong way to ask them.
Kyle 05:31 And so there’s a lot of guardrails we give. And at the end of the day, one of the overwhelming things that we see as a result, or a fruit of this is the humanization of the other sitting across from the table, and really a reinvigoration of personal convictions and beliefs on both sides of the table, as well. So, when I get feedback from Latter-day Saint professors, like how did it go? They’re like, “Great, our students really had to wrestle with what they believe and why they believe it.” I was like, “Ours too.” And so, to me, that’s a really beautiful thing. Because we’re helping each other grow. We’re getting to know each other, and ultimately, hopefully [we’re] glorifying Christ in our conversations.
GT 06:16 Yeah, I think this is wonderful. I wish there were way more people that would do this kind of dialogue. I mean, I can’t say–I’m just a Mormon history geek. I just love Mormon history, and you’re a Strang expert. And so, we get along for that reason, alone. But it’s hard to find people who are not combative when you talk about religion, especially differences in religion. And so, it’s one of the things that I love about you, Kyle, is you’re very respectful. You don’t believe what I believe. But it’s a respectful relationship we have.
Book of Mormon Not Trinitarian?
GT 06:57 And I’d actually like to dive into a little bit of those differences right now. I don’t know if this is something you guys talk with your students. But when we were in Florida, you, me and Steve [Pynakker][1] went to dinner? I’m trying to remember it was. It wasn’t Chili’s.
Kyle 07:09 It was something like that, a chain.
GT 07:10 Yeah, it was I think it was an Italian restaurant. But, anyway…
Kyle 07:12 It was good. Oh, Cabelas.
GT 07:13 Yeah, something like that. Yeah, Carrabba’s, that’s what it was. So, we had a conversation, because one of the things that I’ve heard over and over and I believe, is the Book of Mormon is very Trinitarian.[2] Now, a lot of Mormons might have a little problem with that. But I think it’s pretty well accepted among the scholarly community, that the 1830 Book of Mormon is very Trinitarian. And so, I asked you that question, and I got a surprising response. So, is the Book of Mormon Trinitarian?
Kyle 07:14 I don’t think so.
GT 07:27 {Chuckling} And then I said, I think I said, “Well, is it modalistic?
Kyle 08:03 Not really.
GT 08:05 See, so Chris, I remember Chris Thomas, he said that the Book of Mormon was Trinitarian, with modalistic fuzziness,[3] I think, is how he said it.
Kyle 08:17 Yeah, I could see that.
GT 08:20 So, we are sort of recreating it. Of course, Steve’s not here this time. But I want to recreate that conversation.
Kyle 08:29 Yeah, sure. So Chris, if you’re looking for like an evangelical’s engagement with the Book of Mormon, Chris is going to be the go-to guy. I don’t consider myself a systematic theologian. So, all that is caveated. This is me and my perspective. But really, it started when I was when I was reading through the Book of Mormon for the very first time. And I asked somebody, “How do I understand what the Book of Mormon is communicating about the nature of God? What is God and what is he like?” They’re like, “Oh, you’ve got to go to Mosiah 15.” And this is the hermeneutical key to unlock everything. So, I go to Mosiah 15:1-4, and I really think that’s where people stop, and you need to add 5, because that’s what the Holy Spirit comes in. The Holy Spirit’s not mentioned until verse 5, there. And as I was reading it, the thing that kept popping out to me was, this is the most unique form of Unitarianism I’ve ever read. And I shelved the thought. I continued reading through the Book of Mormon. And anytime I would come across another passage where it’s talking about God’s deity, like the Zeezrom/Amulek dialogue…
GT 09:48 It’s impressive that I’m talking to an evangelical and he knows even Zeezrom is. {Chuckling}
Kyle 09:54 That’s an interesting conversation that we had. Ether, so Jesus is presenting himself as the Eternal Father. I kept going back to like, Whoa! This is a really crazy Unitarianism. So, what do we mean by that? So Unitarianism, obviously, is the belief in, literally one God and any kind of association with him, even a spirit, you need to be really careful with. The Spirit is God’s activity or revelation in the world. The Son is not co-equal with God. He’s man that’s adopted, usually, is how they would say it. But Unitarianism is popular in early American history. And one of the things that I think would resonate with a Latter-day Saint audience is that Unitarianism is trying to restore primitive Christianity. They don’t like Trinitarianism. They’re like, “That’s an insertion into the development of Christian doctrine. That’s not what the earliest Christians believed.” And they placed a very heavy emphasis on morality and ethics, repentance, and I see a lot of that in the Book of Mormon, like repent. Come into Christ. Follow the law, etc.
Kyle 11:07 But then, I start reading things and I’m like, well, the Book of Mormon is either Trinitarian, or its Modalist. And I played with that idea for a little bit with Modalism. But Modalism, I didn’t think quite fits either. Because what Modalism is trying to say is there’s one God that acts in three modes. So, when he’s the Father, he’s acting in creation. When He’s the Son, He’s acting in redemption. And when he’s the Holy Spirit, He acts in sanctification, and salvation. And Trinitarians would say, “But what do you do with like Jesus’ baptism, when all three show up at the same time, the voice from heaven as the Father, the Son is in the water, and the spirit is the dove.” But what I see happening in the Book of Mormon is the author is trying to resolve all of these tensions and these issues. And when you look at Mosiah 15:1-5, I see that there’s no difference between the Father and the Son, even in chronology and location, if that makes sense. So, a modalist would say there’s a difference between the Father and the Son in chronology. Sometimes he is the Father. Other times, he is the Son.
GT 12:10 Okay.
Kyle 12:11 And there’s differences in location. If he’s the Father, he’s in heaven. If He’s the Son, He’s on Earth. But then you read Mosiah 15. and you say, “No, those things are happening simultaneously. He’s not living in a mode of Father or of Son. He’s living in both of those modes simultaneously.” So, how do you explain that? And I think what’s happening is there’s a bit of what Martin Luther would have called, reformers would have public repletive of or ubiquitous presence of God. That’s how they understand the Lord’s Supper. So, how can the elements be Christ, and yet really be the elements, because Christ body ascended to heaven? We’ve got to remember, Christ is truly man, so he’s limited in space. But according to Protestant theology, he’s also truly God who has a spirit and is everywhere. So, Christ in the elements is both present physically with us, and spiritually present in heaven. He’s never not in both of those locations at the same time. And for me, that’s what the Book of Mormon is saying. Like when you’re seeing [Christ], what you’re seeing is a reflection of this being from Heaven. And so, it’s not that he’s sometimes the Son, sometimes the Father, which is what Modalism says. He’s always the Son and always the Father. And He is present with us physically, on earth, simultaneously being present in heaven, as the Father, and because he is both the creator and the Redeemer, he is called the Eternal Father. Like this is both his creative and his redemptive role. So now, I’ll grant that’s A. It’s my opinion. B. I haven’t sat down and researched and all that. And I’m reaching in my–this is like the frontier of my ability to talk theology in the Book of Mormon. But that’s what we talked about at dinner. And any of your listeners out there interested in doctrine, maybe tell me how I’m wrong.
GT 14:21 Well, my first question, and I will freely admit, I don’t understand the Trinity very well at all. What you just described, as you call Unitarianism, how is that different than the Trinity?
Kyle 14:42 So, the difference between Unitarianism and Trinitarianism is that Unitarianism sees absolutely no difference between the Father and the Son. So, there isn’t a person of the Father and there’s isn’t a person of the Son. Whereas, Trinitarianism says no, there are definitely differences. And to this, a Latter-day Saint would agree.
GT 14:58 Yeah.
Kyle 14:58 You can say this is the activity of the Father, and that is the activity of the Son. Unitarian would say, no. All activities are of the Father, through this Chosen Vessel, this man that he adopted, the Son. Another way to look at it is for a Trinitarian, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, all share the same essence, or the same being or the same thingness of God, what it means to be God, equally as three persons: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. So, if the Father is eternal, ungenerated and timeless, so is the Son, so is the Spirit. And a Unitarian would say, no. The Father God is the only thing that’s ungenerated and eternal. The Son was created, and the Spirit is like the force, the activity of God in creation. So, I know that sounds like we are splitting super thin hairs.
GT 15:52 Thank you.
Kyle 15:54 But, A, if you’re a theology nerd, oh, it makes a big difference. But, B, it starts to touch on things of doctrines of salvation. If Christ has come to redeem us, in our sin, how can he do so as a limited man? He needs to be unlimited, in a sense, which is why he’s truly God. This is really important for, like the Council of Nicaea, pushing against the guy named Arius, who’s saying like, no, Jesus was the first thing that God created. The council is like no, because that limits Jesus’ ability to redeem.
GT 16:32 Because Jesus wouldn’t be eternal?
Kyle 16:34 Because Jesus wouldn’t be eternal. There was a time that he was not, that he was, literally… Arius was known for creating songs. And that was one of the lyrics to the songs. So, the concern, the theological concern is like, hey, if you pull the thread on the being of God, and Jesus and the Holy Spirit, you’re also, at the same time, you’re pulling on the thread of salvation.
GT 16:55 Well, I know Joseph Smith said something, “If God has a beginning, then he has to have an end.” And so, I can understand why that would be a heresy. Arius was kind of a heretic. Wasn’t he?
Kyle 17:08 Yes, he was. Well, the right answer is yes. The more kind answer is that Arius was a bishop, and he had authority. He had a flock of people that he cared for. He was a pastor. And he was trying to protect God’s unity. He wanted God to be the ultimate, monotheistic being. And so, when you’re looking at history, from an orthodox, lowercase O orthodox perspective, there’s very few people in the early church history that set out to create heresy. They thought they were defending the faith once delivered for the saints. It’s just when there becomes a consensus among bishops and other churches, that Arius, “I don’t think that’s right, because if you’re pulling that thread, again, you’re going to affect salvation.” And he doesn’t go, “Oh, you’re right.” He says, like, “No, I’m going to reiterate,” then they’re like, “Sorry, you’re out of the club. We can’t have you spreading heresy.” And then they go nuts, because then you read you read accounts about people punching each other at councils and exiling them to Saudi Arabia. That probably was not a good idea.
GT 18:22 Well, Saudi Arabia was Christian back then. Right?
Kyle 18:25 Yes, absolutely. But they sent all the heretics there.
GT 18:34 {Chuckling}
Kyle 18:35 That was the gist of the conversation we’re having in the [restaurant.] I would like to explore that thought, a little more in detail. Because, to me, again, the Book of Mormon is very much a product of early 19th century, late 17th century or 18th century, American Protestantism. And the essence and being of God was very much up for debate, at that time. It was, basically, the Unitarians versus the Trinitarians. And so, it doesn’t surprise me that the Book of Mormon comes along and says, thesis, antithesis, synthesis.
GT 19:14 Okay.
Is Book of Mormon Universalist?
Kyle 19:14 Right? What if it’s not Unitarianism? What if it’s not Trinitarianism? What if it’s some kind of blend of both?
GT 19:21 Well, because that’s interesting, because Richard Bushman has a theory that Joseph Smith, Sr., I believe, and his father. I can’t remember his name. I should know it. But, anyway, I know Joseph Smith, Sr.’s father was a Universalist. And the Universalists and the Unitarians combined, right?
GT 19:47 Yeah. And so, Richard Bushman sees the Book of Mormon, as a Universalist message and it was almost a way, there’s been a theory that it was a way to convert Joseph’s mother’s Methodism with Joseph’s father’s Universalism.
Kyle 20:13 Yeah, that’s interesting. So, my gut reaction in reading the Book of Mormon is it’s a text to convert indigenous people. Secondarily, it’s a warning against Gentile Christians not to abandon their faith. I struggle to see. I don’t know. Obviously, I don’t struggle to see, a kind of Unitarianism in the Book of Mormon, but Universalism is a little harder for me to see, because there’s some texts in there that are like, if you don’t repent, that’s it.
GT 20:48 You’re going to hell.
Kyle 20:48 You’re going to hell, and it’s very descriptive in the punishment of people that don’t repent. And it’s got such a bent or skew towards God’s people in the New World, knowing that Gentiles, one day, are going to read over their shoulders. And so, to me, it’s primarily a text talking to indigenous people, secondarily, a text talking to us Gentiles. And actually, it’s warning of the latter days, and the apocalypse and Christ’s judgment that’s coming. They get a taste of that, in 3rd Nephi when Christ comes. You don’t want that to happen on a universal scale, do you? So, repent and come unto Christ, etcetera. So, I buy the Unitarian side of it I struggle to see the Universalist side of it.
GT 21:40 Maybe, you know, as Joseph’s–this gets into a debate of whether the Book of Mormon is the fullness of the gospel, or is it the Doctrine and Covenants that adds all this stuff to it? Because, especially as we compare the 1830 Book of Mormon with, say, the King Follett sermon in 1844, Joseph’s theology became much more Universalistic. Would you agree with that?
Kyle 22:08 One hundred percent. Yeah, I think when you get to the three-tiered heaven, essentially you have Universalism. I mean, at a certain point, Joseph denies complete Universalism, because you do have Outer Darkness. You do have, where’s the devil going to go for eternity?
GT 22:30 Sons of perdition.
Kyle 22:30 Sons of perdition, et cetera. So, you can’t say you have a complete Universalism. But then, as the degrees of glory ascend from the lowest to the top, telestial, terrestrial and celestial, the population shrinks. But there is a sense in which again, it’s answering questions that people have at the time. Like, how can God be good, yet require the hearing, the reception of the gospel, and yet have a people, an entire continent of people over here for 1500 years, never hear that message? And then the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith came along and said, like– well, in the Book of Mormon, I think the answer is A. they’re not innocent. They’re Jews, and they had the law and they rejected it. And they had the gospel, and they rejected it. But then Joseph said, “And God is gracious enough to be able to resurrect all people to certain degrees of glory, depending on where they want to go.” Really, it’s where do you want to go? And that is a radically different message on the backdrop of, like, Calvinism, during the day. Calvinism is saying, it’s not a choice. It’s not up to you. It’s up to God.
Kyle 22:41 So how did we get there?
GT 23:46 Universalism.
Kyle 23:48 Universalism, that’s right. Yeah. I struggle to see Universalism in the Book of Mormon. I definitely see it growing as Joseph is expanding, the canon we’ll say, through his revelations, yes, definitely.
Why Mormons Aren’t “Teir 1” Christians
GT 24:02 Okay. [Let’s talk about] your background. Now, I know you went to a Southern Baptist seminary. If someone were to come up to you today, and I’m going ask you this question, are you a Baptist? You would say?
Kyle 24:16 Theologically, yes.
GT 24:17 You are? Okay. Because it was interesting to me to learn a little bit more about your background and your church’s background. Because you have Presbyterians and you have spent some time with the Anglicans, which really surprised me because when I think Anglican, I think, well, they’re just Catholics. Aren’t they? Basically.
Kyle 24:39 You can’t tell them that.
GT 24:43 And so you have a little bit of an eclectic background, because you also said your church is more of an independent church. So, you wouldn’t call yourself a Southern Baptist? No; just a regular run of the mill Baptist?
Kyle 24:56 Yeah. So this is a hard thing to explain to most Latter-day Saints.
GT 25:01 There’s only one true church, Kyle. {Chuckling}
Kyle 25:03 That’s right. As a Strangite scholar, I have to object. It’s hard to explain, because what most Latter-day Saints know is an institution, a single church structure with a single authority that terminates in an office. And then you look at Protestantism, you’re like, What the heck? In some ways…
GT 25:27 You’re a Baptist. You’re an Anglican. How does this work?
Kyle 25:29 How can you be all of these things? In some ways, the concerns that Joseph had 200 years ago, they haven’t been mitigated, okay. But, at the same time, the thing that unites Protestantism, theologically, are the solas, like sola fide, sola gratia, sola scriptura. We can talk about that if you want to. And that’s kind of what the church where I pastor is trying to hold on to, and, even, in a sense, retrieve to the point where we’re like, mere Protestant. We’re going to emphasize what we would consider top level, tier one issues. And we’re not going to fight over secondary or third level issues, which is what’s happening in Joseph Smith’s day: modes of baptism, church membership. Should you be an independent church? Or should you belong to a synod? These are the things that people are fighting and splitting over. And we’re not going to do that at our church.
Kyle 26:24 So yes. When you look at my personal background, it has in it the other restoration movement. So that’s Alexander Campbell, which Sidney Rigdon was briefly part of, and Anglicanism. So, I was a part of an Anglican community for three years. And then now this independent, mere Protestant church. The leadership in our church comes from a bit of an eclectic background as well. So, we have folks from Southern Baptist, Presbyterian, Assemblies of God, or charismatic backgrounds. We have a lot of former Roman Catholics, because the city where our church is, has a deep Catholic history. It was founded by the French in 1702.
GT 27:16 They haven’t been overrun by the Baptists yet?
Kyle 27:18 Baptists have tried. They just can’t do it. No, there’s a strong [Catholic influence.] It’s kind of like New Orleans. There is still a very strong Catholic presence, which is very odd in the Deep South. Right?
GT 27:30 Yeah, very odd.
Kyle 27:32 So, again, we just want to emphasize the things that bring us together in unity, rather than theologically police or gatekeep those second and third level issues.
GT 27:50 Well, I want to know what is a tier-one issue to you?
Kyle 27:53 That’s a great question. So, a tier-one issue to us would be, some of the things are very basic, like the existence of God, the coming of Christ in the flesh.
GT 28:02 I’m going to check off if Mormons meet this. Yeah, so far, so good.
Kyle 28:07 And what I’m getting at is, these are very clear things written in scripture. So, the theme is going to be, at the end of the day, sola scriptura scripture. Right? The coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh, because if you deny Jesus came in the flesh, John says in 1st John, you’re not of us.
GT 28:21 Okay, Mormons meet that one. Check.
Kyle 28:22 [You must believe in] the literal, bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ.
GT 28:25 Mormons check off that one.
Kyle 28:26 The coming of Christ, again, to judge the living and the dead.
GT 28:29 Ok.
Kyle 28:30 Bodily, this isn’t a metaphor of how things are going to [be.] It’s going to happen, in the end.
GT 28:34 We’re still tier one.
Kyle 28:35 You’re still tier one. Yeah, there’s a lot of agreement with tier one. It’s just when you double click on the terms…
GT 28:44 {chuckles}
Kyle 28:44 The regeneration of the Holy Spirit, the work of salvation is not yours.
GT 28:51 It’s like being born again. Is that what you’re saying?
Kyle 28:53 Being born again, yes. It’s completely a work of God. To me, to nuance that for a second, I reject the idea of having a born-again experience. I know, we hear that a lot. I don’t think that’s a biblical thing. And this is why. Do you remember being born?
GT 29:12 No.
Kyle 29:13 But how can you prove to me that you were?
GT 29:15 I’m here.
Kyle 29:15 You’re here. So, the imagery or the metaphor that Jesus is giving to Nicodemus in John, by being born again, is you don’t necessarily have to remember when you were born. But you need to have evidence that you were born again. How does evidence [show up of] being born again? It’s changed life. It’s fruit of the Holy Spirit, et cetera, et cetera. So, we do need to see, essentially, sanctification in your life and that is the work of the Holy Spirit, as well.
GT 29:16 So, Mormons check off this one. We’re still tier one.
Kyle 29:23 Here we go. Are you ready?
GT 29:24 I’m ready. I’ve got my seatbelt.
Kyle 29:28 Here’s where we’re going divert paths. The highest earthly authority is scripture, and Scripture alone, 66 books in the Bible, Hebrew Bible and Christian New Testament.
GT 29:57 [Buzzer sound]
Kyle 29:57 We don’t accept living prophets. We believe in the gifts of the Holy Spirit. So, if there is some kind of like, if God speaks to somebody, you have to run it through the firewall of scriptures.
GT 30:15 Let me stop you there for a minute, because I know that Greek Orthodox, have more than 66 books in the Bible. Maybe I should list them: Tobit, Maccabees (first and second.) Yeah, the Apocrypha, we would call it. I think there’s some Ethiopian churches that have even different [books.]
Kyle 30:44 And on top of that, the Greek Orthodox have 151 Psalms. So, even in the text that we would agree on, they [have more.] Because in the Protestant/Catholic canon, Psalms is only 150.
GT 30:56 But they would still meet the tier-one definition, whereas Mormons, because we have the Book of Mormon, and the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price, we’re kicked out of the club.
Kyle 31:06 Well, you weren’t kicked out. You never showed up to begin with.
GT 31:11 {Chuckling} Ouch!
Kyle 31:13 I don’t mean that as an offensive thing, because our church unites around that covenant, why would a Latter-day Saint want to join our church? And so, it’s not just like a gatekeeping thing. It’s also like, hey, if you’re part of this community, this is what we’re [about.]
GT 31:30 You’ve got to dump all that other stuff.
Kyle 31:32 You’d have to. Yeah, and it’s also like, this is what you’re committing to, if you want to commit. Sure you can come in, but this is the covenant community that we think is most important, and we believe is true. And so, if you don’t, you’re probably not going to like it here, right? So, it’s not like we’re trying to be mean. We just want to make sure, if you’re sold, and you’re on board with this, come on! Let’s go. But if you’re not…
GT 32:00 See, that brings up another question with the Community of Christ. They were accepted 10-20 years ago, into the National Council of Churches, and they didn’t have to get rid of the Book of Mormon. Do they meet the tier-one definition that we were talking about?
Kyle 32:19 We don’t have any association or control over that.
GT 32:23 I mean, the understanding is, and this is where LDS are going to be different. Community of Christ will accept any Protestant baptism as legitimate. And so, if you’re baptized Baptist and you want to join the Community of Christ, all you need to do is be confirmed. So, they’re not as hung up on the authority issue, as say LDS are. But I guess my question is, would they meet this tier-one definition of Scripture, then? Because they do have the Book of Mormon as part of their canon.
Kyle 32:59 They have a prophet.
GT 33:00 And they have [a prophet.] So, they’re not in the tier one.
Kyle 33:04 No. Because what is the relationship of the prophet to give you revelation? And because they have an open canon through the mouth of the prophet, we would say no.
GT 33:13 Oh, yeah. They’re still adding to it more than more than we are.
Kyle 33:16 Yeah, you guys got to catch up.
GT 33:17 We’re only 13[8] I think, and they’ve got 165 or something.
Kyle 33:23 Yeah, so it’s that prophetic authority would keep us at arm’s length from Community of Christ.
GT 33:32 Okay. Anything else on tier one? Or is it just the scripture [that separates us.]
Kyle 33:36 There’s other things. I mean, I forget the things that I’ve listed off already. But a lot of the tier one things you’re going to find in the Apostle’s Creed. If you want like a cheat sheet to it, that would be good.
Tier 2 Christians
Kyle 33:50 And then tier-two things get into like, we all agree baptism is important. We can disagree on modes of baptism. We all agree that Lord’s Supper is important. We can disagree on frequency, or what are the elements that we partake.
GT 34:10 Crackers versus bread, and that kind of thing and water versus wine.
Kyle 34:14 Latter-day Saints. Right? So for example, our church has two…
GT 34:19 Does anybody use water, besides Latter-day Saints?
Kyle 34:21 I’ve not found any.
GT 34:22 I don’t think so.
Kyle 34:22 Actually interesting, this is Gospel Tangents. Right? So, we can go on tangents.
GT 34:26 Exactly.
Kyle 34:26 I’m writing a book. I was doing–the book is 40 Questions about Mormonism. And one of the questions was, How do Latter-day Saints view the Lord’s Supper? And I’ll just be honest, I just went through the standard thing, because what I really wanted to know is why water? I have a whole little section on the water. And this is all I found. Obviously, Word of Wisdom plays into it. But even the First Presidency is using wine in the sacrament, well into the 1870s.
GT 34:58 Well, even the 1900s, I think.
Kyle 35:00 Nineteen hundreds, right. That’s when it starts to shift.
GT 35:04 Which I think has to do with Prohibition. But Casey Griffiths disagrees with me on that.[4]
Kyle 35:09 I think it’s Prohibition. And here’s why. There are two things happening at the same time. This is what’s fun when you get an evangelical to say, “Hey, I have a point to make.” [The year] 1892 is when there’s this first quasi-shift, a quasi-official shift. Because the official shift doesn’t come until later, during Prohibition. But we’re getting primed for that Prohibitionary shift. In 1892, there’s some instruction from the First Presidency. We’re not going to do wine anymore. Let’s start doing the water thing.
Kyle 35:46 In 1893, is when a guy by the last name of Welch starts a grape juice company. And the reason he starts the grape juice company is so that, and he’s got this quote, in his last will and testament, “The Lord’s Supper would have the true fruit of the vine and not the cup of the devil.” So this is pre-Prohibition. Right? And right as the Latter-day Saints are moving from wine to water, broader Protestantism in the United States is starting to move from (not all of us, right,) mainly the Baptists and Low Church, Bible churches are starting to move from wine to grape juice. And I’m like, you guys missed out on that. You could have come with us and had grape juice. Right? But I thought that was really interesting. Because there’s a lot of [similarities.] Latter-day Saints didn’t develop in a bubble, even though you were out here, you were still affected by culture. But as Protestants, especially like Baptists, and Methodists and those types of denominations are rejecting wine to go to grape juice. You’re rejecting wine. You go to water. That was fun.
GT 36:57 That’s interesting. But that would be a tier two? So tier two: modes of baptism, Lord’s Supper. What else would there be?
Kyle 37:05 Church government.
GT 37:09 Whether you can be independent versus have a big structure?
Kyle 37:12 Yeah, if you’re in a session or something like that.
Tier 3 Issues
Kyle 37:15 And then tier-three issues are going to be things like, end times interpretations. So, if tier one is Jesus is bodily coming back. And tier two is kind of like, Well, are we presently in the millennium? Or is the Millennium going to come in the future? Is it physical? Tier three is going to be in those really specific niche questions about the end times.
GT 37:42 Or as you would say, The Rapture. Or do you say that?
Kyle 37:46 I don’t. So, this will sound strange, I know. I don’t believe in the Rapture.
GT 37:52 Really?
Kyle 37:53 In the way that it’s, yeah. So I don’t want to get too much into the weeds. But basically, the rapture is not, from what I understand, Paul is writing [and] in the particular language that he uses, the Rapture is not something that’s going to happen, right before Jesus comes to get all the elect off the earth, so they don’t have to face…
GT 38:14 …the burning, that’s going to happen. {Chuckling}
Kyle 38:14 When in the Old Testament and in the New Testament, were Christians promised [that] you get to be out of here while this happens? And they’ll be like, oh–people that are a proponents of Rapture are like, well, look at Noah and the ark. They were going an ark. So, they were safe. I was like, yeah, but they were still in the flood. It wasn’t that they got out of it and they went to paradise for a little bit while the earth suffers. And, moreover, look at Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. God doesn’t spare them from the fire. He protects them in the fire. That’s the theme in the Bible for those whom God loves, who loves him back. Then, on top of that, rapture if I’m not mistaken, I’ve not thought about this in a long time, but I’m fairly positive the word that Paul uses is the same one that Jesus uses in a parable, where he’s talking about the end times. He talks about one is work ng the field, one is snatched and the other one is kept. People say, “See, there’s more Rapture.” But the problem is, that’s the same word for ‘to be arrested.’ So it’s not that God is saving the people, the sheep well say. He’s taking away the goats in this arresting manner, as well. So, I don’t think that that vision of the Rapture is true.
GT 39:30 That’s very interesting. Anything else along those lines?
Kyle 39:38 We could talk all day long about theology without any limitations, no guardrails. {Chuckling}
{End of Part 1}
[1] See https://gospeltangents.com/people/steve-pynakker/
[2] See https://youtu.be/tYNuEh8AX6g
[3] See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reujbmTC0nY&list=PLLhI8GMw9sJ6jWYsrsE7gLJOPcXxqDnom&index=3
[4] See https://gospeltangents.com/2021/05/from-word-of-wisdom-to-world-faith/
Copyright © 2023
Gospel Tangents
All Rights Reserved
Except for book reviews, no content may be reproduced without written permission
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 40:52 — 37.4MB) | Embed
Subscribe: Email | | More
