First, let me say that I'm not entirely sure this is the kind of book that AML-list is likely to have reviewed. I'm taking a chance, given its importance.

"How Wide the Divide?" purports to be a conversation between a prominent LDS scholar, Stephen E. Robinson of BYU, and an evangelical scholar, Craig L. Blomberg, of Denver Seminary. The two men met at a meeting, began a conversation, and continued it over a period of time. This book is the culmination of those conversations.

After a brief introduction by each man, four major areas of concern are discussed: Scripture, God & Deification, Christ & The Trinity, and Salvation. Each occupies a chapter; each chapter contains a brief by both men, followed by a joint conclusion.

Given the divergent views of Mormonism and evangelicalism on these subjects, one would be surprised to learn that there is much in the way of agreement. On the contrary, there is a quasi-agreement between the men that fits a somewhat disagreeable formula: "We believe in <fill in the blank>; you say you believe in <fill in the blank>. But you really don't, since you also believe in <fill in the blank>. Nonetheless, your belief in <fill in the blank> doesn't exclude you from being considered a true Christian."

For his part, Robinson acquits himself well, until he finds himself in the role of apologist for centrist Mormonism, a Mormonism that may not exist except in the pages of his own books. Hence, such remarkable statements as "By and large the LDS do not worry as much about orthodoxy within their own community as do Evangelicals, though there is such a thing as LDS orthodoxy." (p. 15) I imagine the folks at Correlation may have something to say about that. Similarly, beginning on page 16, Robinson, at some length, re-phrases the the Articles of Faith (he calls it a "partial paraphrase" and then goes on for nearly two pages to re-state the Articles), weeding out those phrases that evangelicals might find offensive (the Bible is the Word of God, but no mention about it being translated correctly).

But then Blomberg begins his trek down the same path. He admits, astonishingly, that, in principle, the canon is not closed, but in practice, it is. No evangelical in my experience would ever admit to the former; the canon is closed, period. That Blomberg would advance such an idea is a sign of what is to come -- a tedious path down the road of ecumenical mediocrity.

Edging Toward Center

At times, both men seem to lean much further toward center than others in their movement might be willing to do. Consider Robinson's view: "In the LDS view God is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, infinite, eternal and unchangeable." It seems to this non-member that such a view would not be supportable in light of ideas advanced by Presidents of the Church.

Which brings up the major flaw in Robinson's argument, and he shows his hand later in the book -- his underlying defense against attacks on Mormonism is that only the Standard Works, only Scripture, may be appealed to for authoritative answers. When challenged with such aberrations as the Adam-God idea (taught by Brigham Young), Robinson quickly points out that such statements are not scripture, and are thus not authoritative. But then, on page 140, he states:

The only binding sources of doctrine for Latter-day Saints are the Standard Works of the church: the Bible, the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price. The only official interpretations and applications of these doctrinal sources are those that come to the church over the signatures of the First Presidency or the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (collectively). All the rest is commentary.

And thus the dilemma -- where BY's ideas on Adam-God part of the "official interpretations and applications" of the Scriptures, and thus authoritative? In this one statement, Robinson seemingly negates his foundational thesis. Or perhaps I'm reading too much into it.

Conclusion

Having said all the above, the book is a tedious but worthwhile read. Both Blomberg and Robinson repeat their points so often that one wonders if an editor could not have pruned it a bit. But the book DOES reflect an emerging concern on both fronts: Robinson's Mormonism wants to be accepted by the larger Christian world, and Blomberg's evangelicalism wants to accept Mormonism into larger Christianity. Will it work? I'm not so sure.

If unity between the groups requires the watering-down of historic doctrine that this book preaches, then perhaps separation is indeed the better way.

Both men deserve a hearing. The book is available at Deseret Book outlets. How will it be received by the Church? I hadn't heard a word about it until the clerk at the local DB (who knows me well enough to know what I like to read) grabbed it from the shelf and convinced me to read it.

If any of you read the book, I would be very grateful to learn of your reaction.

[Jeff Needle]
... nfx v3.1 jeff.needle@general.com