Sunday, December 20, 2020

The Blasphemous Understanding of Sin and Salvation within Many Protestant Circles

  

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. Now Zeezrom said unto the people: See that ye remember these things; for he said there is but one God; yet he saith that the Son of God shall come, but he shall not save his people-- as though he had authority to command God. Now Amulek saith again unto him: Behold thou hast lied, for thou sayest that I spake as though I had authority to command God because I said he shall not save his people in their sins. 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)

 

Within many strains of Protestantism, especially that of the “no-Lordship Salvation” perspective, there is a very low view of sin. Consider the following (one can replace “suicide” with adultery, murder, etc):

 

3. What happens to a person who commits suicide?

 

He doesn’t have time to deal with the sin he is committing before he dies. All of our sins were paid for at the cross, including sins like suicide. Therefore, a Christian who commits suicide does not face hell. However, he does have to face the bema with the shame of such a sin and will certainly receive stern reproof from Christ and miss certain rewards reserved for those who finish their courses. (Joe L. Wall, Going for the Gold: Reward and Loss at the Judgment of Believers [Chicago: Moody Press, 1991], 60)

 

Such a blasphemous view of sin and salvation is just taking Protestant soteriology to its logical conclusion. Even if one is a Lordship proponent and holds to the “Perseverance of the Saints” understanding of “eternal security,” when one is justified, not just their past and then-present, but also future sins have been forgiven, so no sin will result in one losing their salvation. Furthermore, note how such is informed by the belief that Christ’s atonement is a legal payment, informed, in part, by a misreading of John 19:30.


For articles refuting such blasphemous nonsense and the underlying theological presuppositions, see, for e.g.:


Response to a Recent Attempt to Defend Imputed Righteousness

Christina Darlington, D&C 82:7, and the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant

1 Corinthians 3:15: A very un-Protestant Biblical Verse

Full Refutation of the Protestant Interpretation of John 19:30



Blog Archive