Introduction

I have enjoyed reading dialogues between LDS scholars and Evangelical scholars over the last decade with a friend, who is an evangelical pastor, to understand my faith. We started with How Wide the Divide? by Stephen Robinson and Craig Blomberg. I enjoyed Robinson’s writing and have found his writing style enjoyable. I read Believing Christ: The Parable of the Bicycle and Other Good News and Following Christ: The Parable of the Divers and More Good News when I was 18. Many LDS have read those two books and probably only know him by those publications. His audio on Believing Christ: Reflections shows his style and demeanor quite well.

We then read Bridging the Divide, Talking Doctrine, Mormon Christianity, and Orthodoxy. There were a few other articles and many verses from scripture that we read as well.

At the end of 2018, I read Does God have a future?, and it was fascinating to see John Sanders comments and responses in the dialogue. The Openness theologians get treated much like LDS theologians. He has some insightful quotes that relate to LDS scripture. I also read a few dialogues between David L. Paulsen and Clark Pinnock that I have referenced as well.

God’s power of persuasion

LDS Scripture

In D&C 121:41 and 121:46 we see this interesting phrase - " without compulsory means it shall flow unto thee forever and ever."

41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;

…

46 The Holy Ghost shall be thy constant companion, and thy scepter an unchanging scepter of righteousness and truth; and thy dominion shall be an everlasting dominion, and without compulsory means it shall flow unto thee forever and ever.

Openness Views by Clark H. Pinnock

However, they were created by God and are sustained by him and are gradually being lured, in spite of themselves, to a future that God has planned.

…

LDS theology recognizes mortality as man’s second estate and the next phase in the battle, which started in the pre-mortal realm, to overcome evil and develop Godlike qualities. This insight becomes especially profound when one attempts to develop a relational theology that effectively deals with the problem of evil, for if intelligences (or spirits) are self-existently eternal and autonomous, then God cannot determine or control the choices that these intelligences may make. His only option is persuasion. Thus, God is relational not solely by choice but by ontological necessity. He must, in order to accomplish his plans and purposes, resort to persuasion, longsuffering, and loving relationships when dealing with others. Open and Relational Theology: An Evangelical in Dialogue with a Latter-day Saint

The power of God is creative, sacrificial and empowering, not coercive, and his glory consists in sharing life with, not dominating, others. . God is transcendent, but In his dealings with us, God is not a cosmic stuffed shirt, who is always thinking of himself. Rather he is open to the world and responsive to developments in history. He remembers the past, savors the present and anticipates the future. He is open to new experiences, has a capacity for novelty and is open to reality, which itself is open to change. God interacts with us in our narrated, storied lives in a real reciprocal relationship. Not only are we as persons affected by God, he is affected by us, or to put it another way, God is unchangeable with respect to his character but always changing in relation to us.

God does not go in for tactics of manipulation because he values personal relationships in which parties are voluntarily involved. God wants the love of real persons not automatons. For this reason, though God initiates the relationships, he cannot control them. The love he seeks is reciprocal; he loves us but does not try to make us love him in return. He is dependent on human beings for these loving relationships. In creating human beings to love them, God assumed a position of vulnerability in relation to them. In fact, God made himself more vulnerable than we are because, though we can count on his steadfast love, he cannot count on ours. . Love, not freedom, is the central issue. Most Moved Mover around pg 41

Does God have a future?

LDS Scripture

In D&C 93:24 - 31 there is a interwoven explanation of the word “truth”. Unfortunately, verse 24 is the only verse that is used to define truth.

24 And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come;

However, if we will keep reading those verses we see another definition or description of “truth” in verse 30.

30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.

Then in verse 31, we get the great punchline.

31 Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.

Openness views by John Sanders

While John Sanders was not providing commentary on the above verses, I think the following quotes from his dialogue lines up with these verses quite well. The quotes help us see how all three of these verses interrelate.

The glory of Yahweh is not that he simply knows what is going to happen. Rather, it is that he can declare what will happen and bring it about that it does, in fact, occur. God knows all the past and all the present completely, and he has the wisdom and power necessary to work with us, and often in spite of us, in order to achieve his purposes.

…

the crucial point is whether God tightly controls each and everything we do.

…

God gives us enabling grace by which we may accept, but can also reject, the divine love

…

The difference here between freewill theists and proponents of meticulous providence is not whether God helps but the type of help God gives. For freewill theists, my child can resist the voice of the Spirit and continue walking into the danger. For you, however, if my child continued walking into danger it would be because God specifically intended my child to do so because the harm brought to my child would help bring about the fulfillment of a greater good in God’s plan.

• openness
• lds
• time