John Pulsipher, in his recounting of a blessing his father gave him, shows us that early Latter-day Saints did not hold to forensic justification/sola fide in how they understood “justification” and how it is brought about:
I will record a
Blessing by my Father at his own house in the eve of the 27th of
D.M.—which was a regular Blessing meeting and feast. Fathers W. Burgess, and
Horace Burgess also conferred Patriarchal Blessings upon their children at the
same time and place.
My son John. I lay my
hands upon your head and by the authority of the holy Priesthood and in the
name of Jesus Christ I grant unto you a father’s blessing.
I say by my free
will, that you are now justified—you have been obedient to all
your commandments, and now for your sake I bless you, and ask the father in the name of
Jesus Christ to let great lasting spiritual blessings rest upon you. (Diary of
John Pulsipher, Volume 1, p. 28 as found in A Mormon Diary as told by John
Pulsipher (1827-1891), emphasis in bold added)
Against Sola Fide, Forensic Justification, Imputed Righteousness, etc
Response to a Recent Attempt to Defend Imputed Righteousness --cf. λογιζομαι in texts contemporary with the New Testament:
Does LDS Theology Confuse the Relationship Between Justification and Sanctification?
Full Refutation of the Protestant Interpretation of John 19:30
An Examination and Critique of the Theological Presuppositions Underlying Reformed Theology
On Baptismal Regeneration (related concept as it refutes many of the tenets of a consistent [historical] Protestant theology of salvation):
Refuting Douglas Wilson on Water Baptism and Salvation
J. Paul Sampley on Baptismal Regeneration and Ephesians 5:25-27
Water Baptism being a Spiritual Circumcision and Baptism being Salvific in Colossians 2:11-14
John Greer vs. the biblical doctrine of baptismal regeneration (Greer, at the time of writing this article, was the moderator of the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster--texts such as Romans 6 are discussed herein)
The Good Thief on the Cross (cf. Matthew W. Bates on the Thief on the Cross)
No, 1 Clement does not teach Sola Fide (many Protestant apologists [e.g., James White; William Webster; Matt Slick; Matthew Paulson] use 1 Clement to support Sola Fide and also have claimed 1 C Clement does not affirm baptismal regeneration--this article soundly refutes these false charges)