A common criticism of Latter-day Saint soteriology focuses upon the fact that, notwithstanding LDS theology that we are all the spiritual sons/daughters of God, we have to be “adopted” as sons/daughters. Some claim that texts in the New Testament that speak of “adoption” (Greek: υἱοθεσία) such as Rom 8:15 is biblical evidence against LDS theology, and various texts in uniquely LDS Scriptural texts is further evidence of how “Mormon” theology is inconsistent with LDS Scriptures. This post will tackle this issue.
Firstly, there is very strong exegetical evidence from the Bible supporting the LDS view that we are the spiritual children of God. I have discussed this issue before, so I won’t rehash the issues here; see:
See also the great essay by Dana M. Pike, Exploring the Biblical Phrase "God of the Spirits of All Flesh" that appeared in Bountiful Harvest: Essays in Honor of S. Kent Brown, eds. Andrew C. Skinner, D. Morgan Davis, and Carl W. Griffin (2011)
Secondly, in Latter-day Saint soteriology, notwithstanding being the sons and daughters of God, as a result of the Fall, we have become both morally and epistemologically fallen and, as a result, are in a spiritually estranged state. As the brother of Jared said:
O Lord, thou hast said that we must be encompassed about by the floods. Now behold, O Lord, and do not be angry with thy servant because of his weakness before thee; for we know that thou art holy and dwellest in the heavens, and that we are unworthy before thee; because of the fall our natures have become evil continually; nevertheless, O Lord, thou hast given us a commandment that we must call upon thee, that from thee we may receive according to our desires. (Ether 3:2)
As King Benjamin said in his famous farewell address:
For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father. (Mosiah 3:9)
Thirdly, the ancient concept of adoption is not one-to-one-equivalent to our modern practice of adoption. Indeed, the ancient practice often entailed a biological child being adopted by their biological father. As one non-LDS systematic theologian wrote:
Today, when one speaks of adoption, he refers to the legal process whereby a stranger becomes a member of the family. In Paul’s time, however, adoptions referred to that legal process whereby a parent placed his own child in the legal position of an adult son, with all the privileges of inheritance. Someone may question why adoption was required when the child was already a son by birth. It must be remembered that in pagan Rome, a citizen often had many wives and many children. Some of the wives may have been concubines and slaves. The citizen may not have wanted the offspring of his slave wives to receive his titles, position in society, and inheritance. The legal procedure of adoption, therefore, provided a means whereby the citizen could designate those children which he wished to be considered his legal sons and heirs. Through receiving newness of life, believers become children of God. Through adoption, the children of God are declared to be His sons, who have all the privileges and inheritance of sonship. (Alva G. Huffer, Systematic Theology [Oregon, Illin.: The Restitution Herald, 1960], 390)
Such concepts fits perfectly with Latter-day Saint soteriology on many points.
While much more could be said, it is clear that, instead of being both internally inconsistent and inconsistent with biblical theology, Latter-day Saint theology is both internally consistent and consistent with biblical theology on this (and many other) areas.
Support Scriptural Mormonism
