![\"Mojave](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/186\/2017\/01\/Heavens_Above_Her.jpg\")
<\/a>(Wikimedia Commons public domain image)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\u201cPerspectives on the Soteriological Problem of Evil: Nuancing the \u201cUniversalist\u201d Theologies of Henri de Lubac and Joseph Smith,\u201d<\/a> written by Timothy Gervais<\/a>.<\/p>\n Abstract:<\/strong> Since the discovery of the new world by Christian European explorers during the age of discovery, the increasingly global community of the modern age has confronted Christian theologians with difficult soteriological questions. These questions have caused many Christian adherents to abandon conceptions of a uniquely Christian salvation in favor of theological positions of religious pluralism. Other Christian theologians have confronted these issues through creative inclusivist theological constructs that expand the offer of salvation to those who may not have professed Christianity in their mortal life. These inclusivist theologies are uniquely suited to address modern concerns about the salvation of non-believers in a largely un-Christian world, while still maintaining the exclusive Christian claim that salvation comes only through Christ. The inclusivist theologies of Catholic theologian Henri de Lubac and Joseph Smith are investigated and nuanced to display how they maintain a uniquely Christian view of salvation, while expanding traditional conceptions of who will receive access to salvific grace.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u201cInterpreting Interpreter: Inclusive Soteriologists,\u201d<\/a> written by Kyler Rasmussen<\/a><\/p>\n This post is a summary of the article \u201cPerspectives on the Soteriological Problem of Evil: Nuancing the \u201cUniversalist\u201d Theologies of Henri de Lubac and Joseph Smith<\/a>\u201d by Timothy Gervais in Volume 63 of Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship<\/em>. All of the Interpreting Interpreter<\/em> articles may be seen at https:\/\/interpreterfoundation.org\/category\/summaries\/<\/a>. An introduction to the Interpreting Interpreter<\/em> series is available at https:\/\/interpreterfoundation.org\/interpreting-interpreter-on-abstracting-thought\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n A video introduction to this Interpreter article is now available on all of our social media channels, including on YouTube at https:\/\/youtube.com\/shorts\/046kmbWilNI<\/a>.<\/p>\n The Takeaway:<\/strong> Gervais details two figures who have promoted a more inclusive view of Christian salvation\u2014Joseph Smith and Henri de Lubac\u2014suggesting that the former provides a more robust theology that aligns with the biblical requirements for both baptism and God\u2019s universal love.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n The Interpreter Foundation has made a whole flotilla of materials available online (and at no charge) in an effort to support the Come, Follow Me<\/em> curriculum for 2025. \u00a0And especially for February<\/em> of 2025. \u00a0Here is one of those materials. \u00a0Please, if you find it of value, share<\/em> it: \u00a0\u201cEpisode 16: Why Witnesses?\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n Witnesses of the Book of Mormon\u2014Insights Episode 16: Why were witnesses to the Book of Mormon, and to the Gold Plates, necessary? What makes these claims different from others throughout history who have claimed divine visions? This is Episode 16 of a series compiled from the many interviews conducted during the course of the Witnesses film project. . . . These additional resources are hosted by Camrey Bagley Fox, who played Emma Smith in Witnesses<\/em>, as she introduces and visits with a variety of experts. These individuals answer questions or address accusations against the witnesses, also helping viewers understand the context of the times in which the witnesses lived. In this episode, we feature Gerrit Dirkmaat, Associate Professor of Church History and Doctrine at Brigham Young University. For more information, go to <\/span>https:\/\/witnessesofthebookofmormon.org\/<\/a><\/span>. Learn about the documentary movie Undaunted\u2014Witnesses of the Book of Mormon<\/em> at <\/span>https:\/\/witnessesundaunted.com\/<\/a><\/span>.<\/span><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n And definitely do not forget that you can now stream Undaunted<\/em> for free at The Witnesses Initiative<\/a>.<\/p>\n Good news out of the Ninth Circuit, and not only for members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: \u00a0\u201cUnanimous 9th Circuit panel dismisses Huntsman tithing lawsuit, church responds:\u00a0Judges grant summary judgment to Latter-day Saints, saying \u2018no reasonable juror could conclude that the church misrepresented the source of funds for the City Creek project\u2019\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n \u201cChurch reaffirms immigration principles: love, law, family unity:\u00a0Church releases statement, saying 3 principles and guidelines follow previous statements on immigration\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n I would hope that all, or almost all, faithful Latter-day Saints would take this as prophetic guidance. \u00a0But I\u2019m no longer confident of such a reaction. \u00a0See, for example, these two Patheos blog entries that were recently called to my attention:<\/p>\n I\u2019m discouraged and even horrified to read such things. \u00a0The author of the two blog entries directly above evidently pines for the days of a real<\/em> president of the Church, namely Ezra Taft Benson \u2014 who would not have endorsed his attitude. \u00a0\u201cBeware,\u201d warned President Benson, \u201cof those who would set up the dead prophets against the living prophets, for the living prophets always take precedence.\u201d \u00a0Consider, too, these words of the late President Marion G. Romney:<\/p>\n \u201cOne day when President Grant was living, I sat in my office across the street following a general conference. A man came over to see me, an elderly man. He was very upset about what had been said in this conference by some of the Brethren, including myself. I could tell from his speech that he came from a foreign land. After I had quieted him enough so he would listen, I said, \u2018Why did you come to America?\u2019 \u2018I am here because a prophet of God told me to come.\u2019 \u2018Who was the prophet,\u2019 I continued. \u2018Wilford Woodruff.\u2019 \u2018Do you believe Wilford Woodruff was a prophet of God?\u2019 \u2018Yes, I do.\u2019 \u2018Do you believe that President Joseph\u00a0F. Smith was a prophet of God?\u2019 \u2018Yes, sir.\u2019<\/p>\n \u201cThen came the sixty-four dollar question. \u2018Do you believe that Heber\u00a0J. Grant is a prophet of God?\u2019 His answer, \u2018I think he ought to keep his mouth shut about old age assistance.\u2019<\/p>\n \u201cNow I tell you that a man in his position is on the way to apostasy. He is forfeiting his chances for eternal life. So is everyone who cannot follow the living Prophet of God.\u201d [In Conference Report<\/em>, April 1953, p.\u00a0125]<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n I find myself quite naturally thinking of something said by the English , William Law (1686-1761): \u201cIf you have not chosen the Kingdom of God first, it will in the end make no difference what you have chosen instead.\u201d \u00a0(The quotation was a favorite with Elder Neal A. Maxwell.). And here is something from the Prophet Joseph Smith himself:<\/p>\n A Key. Finding fault with the Church (A final key delivered by Joseph in the following Language)<\/p>\n I will give you one of the keys of the mysteries of the kingdom. It is an eternal principle that has existed with God from all Eternity that that man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly that that man is in the high road to apostacy and if he does not repent will apostatize as God lives The principle is as correct as the one that Jesus put forth in saying that he who seeketh a sign is an adulterous person, [8]<\/a> & that principle is Eternal, undeviating & firm as the pillars of heaven, for whenever you see a man seeking after a sign you may set it down that he is an adulterous man. \u00a0(2 July 1839)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/a><\/a><\/a>\n
\n
<\/a>