Michael Flournoy Misunderstands Grace, Mormonism, and the Bible

(For previous responses to Michael Flournoy, click here)

In a recent article entitled Understanding Grace, Misunderstanding Mormonism, Michael Flournoy wrote the following:

[In] Alma 5:28-29 in The Book of Mormon says if we are not stripped of pride and envy we are not prepared to meet God, nor do we have eternal life. Where’s the grace in that? Doctrine and Covenants 82:7 says if we sin our former sins return to us. Where’s the grace in that? Moroni 8:14 states that should someone die while thinking children need baptism, his destination is hell. Where’s the grace in that? Alma 11:37 says that Jesus cannot save us in our sins. My friends, there is no grace in a religion that says we must amputate all sin from our lives before Jesus can save us.

All Michael has shown us that his exegetical skills of the Book of Mormon, not just the Bible, to be utterly pathetic.

Firstly, it should be noted that one would rework this paragraph against Flournoy’s new-found Evangelical Protestantism. After all, there are many similar texts in the Bible.

In Matt 3:8, Jesus commands the Pharisees and Sadducees to produce fruits meet for repentance--how can unregenerate people produce good works? Where is the grace in that? In Matt 22:37//Mark 12:30//Luke 10:27, Jesus tells the Jewish scribe that he must "love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind"--where is the grace in that? In Gal 1:6-9, Paul condemns people for believing circumcision to be necessary before entering the New Covenant—where is the grace in that? In Acts 2:38, Peter commands the crowd to repent and be baptised before receiving a remission of their sins—where is the grace in that? In Jude 4, Jesus clearly does not save people “in” their sins—where is the grace in that?

It should be noted that Moroni 8:14 condemns heretics (in this case, those who add to the gospel, similar to the Judaizers Paul anathemised in Galatians) who preached the absolute necessity of infant baptism. Consistency would require Flournoy to reject Paul as an apostle (I know he won’t—consistency is thrown out of the window when one embraces Protestantism and becomes an anti-Mormon). Furthermore, what does Alma 11:37 actually state? Here is the text:

And I say unto you again that he cannot save them in their sins; for I cannot deny his word, and he hath said that no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of heaven; therefore, how can ye be saved, except ye inherit the kingdom of heaven? Therefore, ye cannot be saved in your sins.

In this verse, Amulek is teaching that one cannot remain “in” their sinful, rebellious state and expect to be saved. The phrase "in their sins" in the Book of Mormon refers to people's on-going rebellion against God. It is a condemnation of those who believe that, as Jesus atoned for sins, ipso facto, people will be saved no matter how they live their lives. Notice how the locution is used throughout the Book of Mormon:

And, in fine, wo unto all those who die in their sins; for they shall return to God, and behold his face, and remain in their sins. (2 Nephi 9:38)

But behold, and fear, and tremble before God, for ye ought to tremble; for the Lord redeemth none such that rebel against him and die in their sins; yea, even all those that have perished in their sins ever since the world began, that have wifully rebelled against God, that have known the commandments of God, and would not keep them; these are they that have no part in the first resurrection.(Mosiah 15:26)

And Zeezrom said again: Shall he save his people in their sins? And Amulek answered and said unto him: I say unto you he shall not, for it is impossible for him to deny his word . . . And I say unto you again that he cannot save them in their sins; for I cannot deny his word, and he hath said that no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of heaven; therefore, how can ye be saved, except ye inherit the kingdom of heaven? Therefore, ye cannot be saved in your sins. (Alma 11:34, 37 [note that this is the immediate context of Alma 11:36])

And remember also the words which Amulek spake unto Zeezrom, in the city of Ammonihah; for he said that the Lord surely should come to redeem his people, but that he should not come to redeem them in their sins, but to redeem them from their sins. (Helaman 5:10)

And wo unto them who shall do these things away and die, for they die in their sins, and they cannot be saved in the kingdom of God; and I speak it according to the words of Christ; and I lie not. (Moroni 10:26)

In Helaman 5:10, quoted above, one reads of how Christ will save people from their sins, and, in v. 11, such is "because of repentance." Passages that explicitly state Christ will save people "from their sins" are quoted below which blows Flournoy's nonsense out of the water:

I say unto you, ye will know at that day that ye cannot be saved; for there can no man be saved except his garments are washed white; yea, his garments must be purified until they are cleansed from all stain, through the blood of him of whom it has been spoken by our fathers, who should come to redeem his people from their sins. Have ye walked, keeping yourselves blameless before God? Could ye say, if ye were called to die at this time, within yourselves, that ye have been sufficiently humble? That your garments have been cleansed and made white through the blood of Christ, who will come to redeem his people from their sins? (Alma 5:21, 27)

And Alma went and began to declare the word of God unto the church which was established in the valley of Gideon, according to the revelation of the truth of the word which had been spoken by his fathers, and according to the spirit of prophecy which was in him, according to the testimony of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who should come to redeem his people from their sins, and the holy order by which he was called. And thus it is written. Amen. (Alma 6:8)

Now Aaron said unto him: Believest thou that the Son of God shall come to redeem mankind from their sins? . . .Now Aaron began to open the scriptures unto them concerning the coming of Christ, and also concerning the resurrection of the dead, and that there could be no redemption for mankind save it were through the death and sufferings of Christ, and the atonement of his blood. (Alma 21:7, 9 BOM)

And remember also the words which Amulek spake unto Zeezrom, in the city of Ammonihah; for he said unto him that the Lord surely should come to redeem his people, but that he should not come to redeem them in their sins, but to redeem them from their sins. And he hath power given unto him from the Father to redeem them from their sins because of repentance; therefore he hath sent his angels to declare the tidings of the conditions of repentance, which bringeth unto the power of the Redeemer, unto the salvation of their souls. (Helaman 5:10-11)

 With respect to Alma 5:28-29, one does have to wonder how Flournoy would respond to John the Baptist if he were alive when John said the following attributed to him in Matt 3:8:

In Matt 3:8, recording the words of John the Baptist to the Pharisees and Sadducees, the KJV reads:

Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance.

The Greek of this text reads:

ποιήσατε οὖν καρπὸν ἄξιον τῆς μετανοίας.

Literally, John is commanding the people “to do” (ποιεω) works that are “worthy” of repentance. The Greek adjective translated as “worthy” is αξιος. In New Testament soteriological contexts, it is always used to describe the reality of someone or something; it is not a mere legal declaration; in other words, something is counted/considered worthy because they/it are intrinsically worthy. We can see this in the Gospel of Matthew itself:

Nor scrip for your journey, neither shoes, nor yet staves: for the workman is worthy (αξιος) of his meat. And into whateoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who it is worthy (αξιος); and there abide till ye go thence . . .And if the house be worthy (αξιος), let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you. (Matt 10:10-11, 13)

He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy (αξιος) of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy (αξιος) of me. (Matt 10:37-38)

Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy (αξιος). (Matt 22:8)

We can also see this in the verb form of this adjective (αξιοω) and its usage in the New Testament. Speaking of Christ and his worthiness, we read the following:

For this man was counted worthy (αξιοω) of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house. (Heb 3:3)

 I am sure Flournoy would be quizzing John, asking "where is the grace???" if he were consistent.

With respect to aspirational texts such as Matt 19:21//Luke 18:22 (cf. Alma 5:28-29; Moroni 10:32, etc), the following from an Evangelical theologian should be sufficient:

Certain difficulties attach to assuming [we can achieve freedom from sin], however.  One is that it seems contradictory to repeatedly exhort Christians to a victorious spotless life unless it is a real possibility.  But does this necessarily follow?  We may have a standard, an ideal, toward which we press, but which we do not expect to reach within a finite period of time.  It has been observed that no one has ever reached the North Star by sailing or flying toward it.  That does not change the fact that it is still the mark toward which we press, our measure of “northerliness.”  Similarly, although we may never be perfectly sanctified within this life, we shall be in eternity beyond and hence should presently aim to arrive as close to complete sanctification as we can.” (Christian Theology. p. 986)

What about D&C 82:7? Here is how the text reads:

And now, verily I say unto you, I, the Lord, will not lay any sin to your charge; go your ways and sin no more; but unto that soul who sinneth shall the former sins return, saith the Lord your God.

Sometimes, critics, and Flournoy is no exception, will point to this verse, especially the highlighted portion, as LDS soteriology being “mission impossible.” The following quotation from perhaps the best commentary on the Doctrine and Covenants helps provide some context:

When those who have sinned repent and are baptized, or, if already baptized, repent and renew their covenants by partaking of the sacrament, then their sins are forgiven them through the atonement of Christ. Even though a particular sin through weakness or other circumstances may recur, it is forgiven again upon further repentance. In the context of the gospel covenant, the Lord will continue to forgive and cleanse us as long as we sincerely repent (see Mosiah 26:30). The Atonement is a shield from all our guilt as long as we continue to repent and remain in the covenant.

Nevertheless, should we choose to break the covenant and refuse to repent, should we shift our loyalty and commitment from Christ to our sins, then the atonement of Christ can no longer shield us, and we become once again accountable for all our own sins. In the context of this verse, sinneth does not mean failing to be perfect; rather, it means to switch our loyalties, to break our covenants with Christ by choosing to serve sin (and, therefore, to serve Satan; see Romans 6:16). Doctrine and Covenants 82:7 must be understood against the backdrop of Mosiah 26:30: "Yea, and as often as my people repent will I forgive them their trespasses against me." Faithful Saints need not fear that their occasional weaknesses will put them outside the covenant and the power of the Atonement. On the other hand, those whose loyalty is to their sins first and to Christ second, third, or not at all, need not expect to be shielded from justice in any degree for all they may have done in this life. If we sin, we must repent. If we sin often, we must repent often. But we must never let go of the rod, never shift our commitment from Christ to our sins. Finally, should we repudiate our covenants, thus losing the shield of the Atonement, not only will our former sins return but they will bring with them a disposition to evil even greater than before (see Matthew 12:43-45). (Stephen E. Robinson and H. Dean Garrett, A Commentary on the Doctrine and Covenants 4 vols. [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2004], 2:12-13).

Commenting on this text, Brigham Young and Howard W. Hunter offered the following comments:

It is present salvation and the present influence of the Holy Ghost that we need every day to keep us on saving ground. When an individual refuses to comply with the further requirements of heaven, then the sins he had formerly committed return upon his head [Ezek. 3:20] ; his former righteousness departs from him, and is not accounted to him for righteousness: but if he had continued in righteousness and obedience to the requirements of heaven, he is saved all the time through baptism, the laying on of hands, and obeying the commandments of the Lord and all that is required of him by the heavens—the living oracles. He is saved now, next week, next year, and continually, and is prepared for the celestial kingdom of God whenever the time comes for him to inherit it. (Brigham Young, JOD 8:124, July 15, 1860)

Whatever the past may have been in our individual lives, it is gone. The future lies ahead, and we must face it with resolution. There is always a point from which we can begin. Even though we may have been faithful in the past, if we turn away, that faithfulness will profit us nothing. "No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God." [Luke 9:62] (Howard W. Hunter, Conference Report, April 1961, p.18)

The biblical texts they referenced reads thusly:

Again, When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand. (Ezek 3:20)

 And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God. (Luke 9:62)

I wonder if Michael will ask “where is the grace in that?” to these passages? One problem of embracing Evangelical Protestantism is that it is a shell-game: instead of being given a “biblical” faith, one receives the consolation prize of an anti-biblical concept of salvation in this lifetime and damnation in the age to come.

A good parallel to the Mosiah 26:30 text is that of Moroni 6:8:

But as oft as they repented and sought forgiveness, with real intent, they were forgiven.

On a related point, often, Latter-day Saints will hear criticisms of their theology of forgiveness as something that is not just mere verbal confession, but one that, where necessary, incorporates restitution for one’s sins and/or other actions, such as true repentance (“Godly Sorry” to borrow from 2 Cor 7:10), and failure to do such resulting in punishments from God, such as the non-forgiveness of sins. (To read a good summary of LDS understandings on this topic, see the discussion in the booklet, True to the Faith, a publication by the Church, often given to newly baptised members of the Church). However, the biblical basis for LDS understanding of this doctrine permeates biblical teachings on this topic. As illustrative examples, consider the following:

And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the Lord; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin. (Exo 32:30)

Pardon, I beseech thee, the iniquity of this people according unto the greatness of thy mercy, and as thou hast forgiven this people, from Egypt even until now. And the Lord said, I have pardoned according to thy word; but as truly as I live, all the earth slal be filled with the glory of the Lord. Because all those men which have seen my glory, and my miracles, which I did in Egypt and in the wilderness, and have tempted me now these ten times, and have not hearkened to my voice; surely they shall not see the land which I sware unto their fathers, neither shall any of them that provoked me see it. (Num 14:19-23)

And Moses said unto Aaron, Take a censer, and put fire therein from off the altar, and put on incense, and go quickly unto the congregation, and make an atonement for them;: for there is wrath gone out from the Lord; the plague is begun. And Aaron took as Moses commanded, and ran into the midst of the congregation; and, behold, the plague was begun among the people and he put on incense and made an atonement for the people. And he stood between the dead and the living; and the plague was stayed. (Num 16:46-48)

Now therefore go to, speak to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you: return ye now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good. (Jer 18:11)

They said, Turn ye again now every one from his evil way, and from the evil of your doings, and dwell in the land that the Lord hath given unto you and to your fathers for ever and ever: and go not after other gods to serve them, and to worship them, and provoke me not to anger with the works of your hands; and I will do you no hurt. Ye have not hearkened unto me, saith the Lord; that ye might provoke me to anger with the works of your hands to your own hurt. Therefore thus saith the Lord of hosts; Because ye have not heard my words, behold, I will send and take all the families of the north, saith the Lord, and Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon, my servant, and will bring them against this land and against this land, and against the inhabitants thereof, and against all these nations round about, and will utterly destroy them, and make them an astonishment, and an hissing and perpetual desolations. Moreover I will take from them the voice of mirth, and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom, and the voice of the bridge, the sound of the millstones, and the light of the candle. And this whole land shall be a desolation, and an astonishment; and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years. (Jer 25:5-11)

But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. And his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live. (Ezek 18:21-22)

Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel? (Ezek 33:11)

Therefore also now, saith the Lord, turn ye even to me with all your heart, and with fasting, and with weeping, and with mourning: and rend your heart and not your garments, and turn unto the Lord your God: for he is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of the great kindness, and repenteth him of the evil. Who knoweth if he will return and repent, and leave a blessing behind him; even a meat offering and a drink offering unto the Lord your God? Blow the trumpet in Zion, sanctify a fast, call a solemn assembly: Gather the people, sanctify the congregation, assemble the elders, gather the children, and those that suck the breasts: let the bridegroom go forth of his chamber, and the bride out of her closet. Let the priests, the ministers of the Lord, weep between the porch and the altar, and let them say, Spare thy people, O Lord, and give not thine heritage to reproach, that the heathen should rule over them: wherefore should they say among the people, Where is their God? Then will the Lord be jealous for his land, and pity his people. Yea, the Lord will answer and say unto his people, Behold, I will send you corn, and wine, and oil, and ye shall be satisfied therewith: and I will no more make you a reproach among the heathen: But I will remove far off from you the northern army, and will drive him into a land barren and desolate, with his face toward the east sea, and his hinder part toward the utmost sea, and his stink shall come up, and his ill savour shall come up, because he hath done great things. (Joel 2:12-20)

And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. (Matt 3:2)

From the time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. (Matt 4:17)

For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. (Matt 6:14-15)

The came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I will forgive him? Till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but Until seventy times seven. (Matt 18:21-22)

Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:37-38)

In Matt 6:14-15, we read the following:

For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

A parallel text would be Mark 11:25:

And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any: that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.

These are important texts, as they show that the Christian’s forgiveness of sins is contingent upon them forgiving others, showing that (1) one does not receive a “blanket forgiveness” of sins at justification and (2) shows that one could lose their salvation. As one scholar wrote on the Matthean text stated:

With this logion Matthew repeats the forgiveness petition of the Lord’s Prayer and puts it in parenetic form. Both the conditional wording and the “negative” v. 15, missing from Mark 11:25, make clear that human forgiving is a condition for divine forgiving. Thus with this statement the evangelist emphasizes precisely the part of the Lord’s Prayer where human activity was most directly involved. In contrast to the logion leading into the Lord’s Prayer (vv. 7–8), which emphasizes God’s nearness, this logion that brings the Lord’s Prayer to a close is designed to secure the relationship between prayer and action. Matthew makes clear that prayer is also part of Christian practice, and practice will again be the subject in 6:19–7:27. The forgiveness commandment corresponds in substance to the heart of his ethics, the love commandment. (Ulrich Luz, Matthew 1-7: A Commentary on Matthew 1-7 [Rev. ed.; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2007], 327; emphasis added)

While more could be said, it should be noted that what informs Flournoy's eisegesis is his acceptance of alien imputed righteousness. For instance, Flournoy made the utterly astonishing claim in the past that Christ's baptism is imputed to the believer in an interview with Dave Bartosiewicz. For a response to Flournoy on this point, see Christ's baptism is NOT imputed to the believer

One should search on "imputation" and other like-terms on this blog to see how such a doctrine is based on eisegesis, such as King David Refutes Reformed Soteriology and my 7-part Study of λογιζομαι and its relationship to New Testament soteriology. Other articles would include

Does Genesis 15:6 prove Reformed soteriology?

Romans 4:9 and the Justification of Abraham

Lev 17:3-4 and Deut 25:1: Evidence of Forensic Justification and Imputation of Alient Righteousness in the Old Testament?

See also Don Garlington's article, Imputation or Union with Christ? A Response to John Piper

For a refutation of the formal doctrine of Protestantism, Sola Scriptura, see

Not by Scripture Alone: A Latter-day Saint Refutation of Sola Scriptura

The following from biblical scholar, Celsius Spicq on the meaning of δικαιοω further refutes the “legal fiction” Reformed apologists teach based on their (eisegesis-driven) reading of the passage (note especially note 88 with reference to Rom 4:5):

Several times St. Paul uses dikaoō in its forensic OT sense, “declare or acknowledge to be just,” especially when he is quoting the OT, but it would be wrong to extend this meaning to all the texts. In the first place, this would be to forget that “verbs in –oō mean to make whatever the root indicates. Thus dikaoō should properly mean ‘make just.’ This meaning is not found in secular Greek for rather natural reasons.’”[86] In the second place, it would overlook the fact that St. Paul, as a converted Pharisee, perceived as no one else did the opposition between the new covenant and the old covenant, law and grace, circumcision and baptism, and perhaps especially the inefficacy of the old legal dispensation compared to the efficacy and realism of the dispensation of salvation centered on the cross of Jesus. The consequence is a radical change in ideas concerning righteousness/justification, as is seen in the frequent linking of the verb “justify” with faith in Christ and in the explicit contrast between justification and the works of the law; there is a different scheme or process for attributing justice/righteousness in the new covenant than in the old covenant. The apostle gives dikaoō a causative sense, as appears from Rom 3:24—“All have sinned and come short of the glory of God (cf. Rom 8:30; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:21); (henceforth) they are justified (present passive participle, dikaioumenoi) freely by his grace, through the redemption (apolytrōsis) that is in Jesus Christ.” God has shown his mercy, but not by pronouncing acquittal pure and simple; through Christ a price was paid, a ransom (lytron) with expiatory value (cf. verse 25: hilastērion), so that “sinners” have become just, have been made truly righteous.[87] Another clear text is Rom 3:26-“to show his justice/righteousness (his salvific action), so that (it might be established that) he himself is just and that he justifies (present active participle, dikaiounta) the one who has faith in Jesus”: the just God communicates his justice/righteousness and makes just.[88]

Notes for the Above

[86] M.J. LaGrange, La Justification selon saint Paul, Revue Biblique 1914, p. 121

[87] “The sacrifice of Christ has satisfied once and for all the demands for outward justice which God had deposited in the Law, and at the same time it has brought the positive gift of life and inward justice which the latter was unable to give” (P. Benoit, Exégèse et théologie, vol. 2 p. 39 n. 2); c. Rom 5:18—“justification gives life.” The best commentary is the Trinitarian baptismal text on the “bath of regeneration and renewal” (Titus 3:7), “so that having been justified by the grace of this (Jesus Christ) our Savior (ἵνα δικαιωθέντες τῇ ἐκείνου χάριτι), we might become . . . heirs . . . of eternal life”: the aorist passive participle denotes the present state of this new and internal righteousness that permits entry into heaven, where nothing impure may go in. C. H. Rosman, “Iusticicare (δικαιουν) est verbum causalitatis,” in Verbum Domini, 1941, pp. 144-147.

[88] Cf. Rom 4:5—“The one who has no works but who believes in the One who justifies (δικαιουντα) the ungodly, will have his faith counted as righteousness.” M.J. Legrange (on this verse) comments: “δικαιοω in the active cannot mean ‘forgive’: it has to be ‘declare just’ or ‘make just.’ That God should declare the ungodly righteous is a blasphemous proposition. But in addition, when would this declaration be made?” H.W. Heidland (TDNT, vol. 4, pp. 288-292) explains λογιζεσθαι: “Justification is not a fiction alongside the reality. If God counts faith as righteousness, man is wholly righteous in God’s eyes . . . He becomes a new creature through God’s λογιζεσθαι.” (Ceslas Spicq, Theological Lexicon of the New Testament [trans. James D. Ernest; 3 vols.: Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1994], 1:340-42)

It is a shame to see someone who claims they want Christ to miss Him so badly as Flournoy does, but this is not the first time, nor, sadly, the last time such will happen in history. However, it does afford one an opportunity to contrast Flournoy's new-found false gospel with that of the true Gospel one finds within The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Flournoy's eisegesis and misrepresentations notwithstanding, a classical case of good coming from evil.

Finally, for Flournoy's blasphemous claim that, in his newfound Evangelical view:

[G]race is better described as insurance, covering us in case we sin.

See Michael Flournoy's ignorance of Hebrews and the Eucharist