The July 2016 issue of "The Friend," the Church's publication for young children, there is an article contained therein, "Your Path to Heavenly Father" by Olivia Corey Randall. Sadly, but not surprisingly, some Evangelicals have critiqued this article, including this article where we read the following:
“Your Path to Heavenly Father” thus reveals that Mormonism views salvation as mainly about accepting the LDS Church’s rituals and rules. No doubt Mormons will insist that faith in Jesus Christ is part of the process, even central to it. Yet the LDS Church, in one of its own official teaching publications, managed to print an article about the steps to salvation that neglected even to mention Jesus Christ. That, Friend, is tragic.
Many of the "arguments" about the (false) claim that LDS soteriology diminishes Jesus Christ the author raises were mirrored by Bobby Gilpin in an article, "Joseph Smith Worship?" which I reviewed and refuted in a paper:
In “Your Path Back to Heavenly Father,” we are told that one has to "Take the sacrament." Responding to this, Bowman writes: "“The sacrament” in Mormon language refers to what Christians call the Eucharist, Communion, or the Lord’s Supper. Again, the LDS Church claims that its members alone are authorized by God to perform this ritual. Regular participation in “the sacrament” is required for salvation. The Mormon claim to a monopoly on the sacrament is also unbiblical."
Ignoring his "arguments" against the LDS view of the Eucharist (a topic I have discussed [albeit, while engaging with Roman Catholic apologists more than Evangelicals on the issue] on this blog quite a bit), this shows the rather deceptive approach to the issue. Why? Because anyone who knows anything about "Mormonism" knows that the sacrament itself is thoroughly Christocentric, and its efficacy is received from Christ's atoning sacrifice.
As I wrote in my response to Bobby Gilpin (linked above):
In the weekly religious service of Latter-day Saints, one partakes of the bread and water in remembrance of the atoning sacrifice of Christ, His resurrection, and His glorious final coming (parousia). Note the words of D&C 20:77, 79 (same as those in Moroni 4-5 in the Book of Mormon), which shows the Christo-centric (not Joseph-centric) soteriology of “Mormonism”:
O God the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this bread to the souls of all those who partake of it, that they may eat in remembrance of the body of thy Son, and witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son, and always remember him and keep his commandments which he has given them; that they may always have his Spirit to be with them. Amen . . . O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this wine to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they may do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them; that they may witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they do always remember thee, that they may have his Spirit to be with them, Amen.
Commenting on these prayers, one of my favourite LDS theologians wrote:
These prayers of consecration are the most perfect forms of sacred literature to be found. So perfect they are that one may not add to them or take ought from them without marring them . . . these prayers of consecration form a rallying point—raise a standard that will make for the holding together in union and fellowship the followers of the Master, beyond all other formulas known to man; and for that purpose, beyond all doubt, were they given, as well as to call up to man's consciousness the sacrifice God made for man's redemption, and man's covenant to remember and to keep God's commandments, that he might always be in union with God. (B.H. Roberts, The Truth, the Way, the Life: An Elementary Treatise on Theology, p. 443)
Further proving (1) that LDS theology is Christocentric and (2) that such is not a novelty in recent years can be seen from the following paragraph of a book, What Jesus Taught by Osborne J.P. Widtsoe (Deseret Book Company, 1926), p.326, which was published for the Deseret Sunday School Union and well before the time when critics claim the Church tried to become more "ecumenical":
The stone which the builders rejected has become the Christ, the Savior of the world. He is the Keystone of our salvation, He is our Master, our Teacher, our Friend. He has restored His Gospel to us with all its blessings and privileges. Him will we follow, and His commandments will we keep; for it was He Himself who said, “I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger, and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.”
Only by engaging in eisegesis, double-standards, engaging in logical fallacies, and ignorance of LDS theology, Scripture, and practice, can Bobby (and other critics) make the (false) claim that, implicitly, worship is given to Joseph Smith and/or Latter-day Saint theology is not truly centred on Christ (cf. my post, "Wilford Woodruff on the Necessity and Rationality of the Atonement")
The same applies for baptism: the efficaciousness thereof is contingent upon the sacrificial death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. At the very least, Jesus Christ is clearly implied in the article in this and other points mentioned therein; any informed Latter-day Saint and/or intellectually honest individual will know that.
Keep in mind that some of Rob’s comments are reflective of the unbiblical and low ecclesiology that permeates much of Evangelicalism and acceptance of sola scriptura. For those who want to see a discussion of these and other issues (including the LDS understanding of soteriology), see, for example, a recent paper I wrote:
Top 17 Reasons Bill McKeever Doesn't Understand the Latter-day Saint Faith
For instance, the topic of baptismal regeneration is mentioned, showing that it is thoroughly biblical. This shows the anti-biblical nature of something Bowman wrote in a facebook discussion page where the article was being discussed: "Nor would any evangelical ever, ever list several rituals that needed to be performed in order to get to God. It would never, ever happen." Apparently, Peter in Acts 2:38 (discussed in the response to McKeever) falls under Bowman's condemnation. That speaks volumes of Rob's soteriology.
For instance, the topic of baptismal regeneration is mentioned, showing that it is thoroughly biblical. This shows the anti-biblical nature of something Bowman wrote in a facebook discussion page where the article was being discussed: "Nor would any evangelical ever, ever list several rituals that needed to be performed in order to get to God. It would never, ever happen." Apparently, Peter in Acts 2:38 (discussed in the response to McKeever) falls under Bowman's condemnation. That speaks volumes of Rob's soteriology.
Overall, not a persuasive piece. One should also note that Matt 5-7, the Sermon in the Mount, never once speaks of placing faith in Christ, though it would be stupid to claim that this is never expected due to this sermon never explicating such. But then again, who cares about consistency when one wishes to portray Mormonism as paying only lip service to Christ?
Update: Bowman attempted to respond. See here for my comments.
Update: Bowman attempted to respond. See here for my comments.