I was however kind of interested in a new article in Meridian about the reason Glenn Beck's interview was pulled from Focus on the Family.
According to Scot Proctor:
One other comment was quoted from Pastor Dustin S. Seger of Shepherd's Fellowship in Greensboro, North Carolina: “They use Mr. Beck's story as a way to show that hope can be found in God, which is true enough; the problem is that Mr. Beck's god is not the Triune God of the Bible nor is his Jesus the Jesus of the Bible.”
This last comment made me sad. I have so many wonderful friends of other faiths and it never enters my mind, not once, that they don't think that I worship the same Jesus Christ that they worship and that this very distinction in their minds is what so pointedly separates us doctrinally.
I decided that I wanted to contact Focus on the Family and get a more detailed explanation of why the Glenn Beck interview was really pulled. In the very midst of that thought we received a note from one of our loyal readers, Mary Wilson, who had already contacted Focus and shared with us the entire response.
Ron Hall from Focus on the Family replied to Mary Wilson:
We hope you will understand that we consider Glenn Beck a good friend of our ministry. We have only feelings of deep appreciation for his valuable contributions to the cause of family values and conservative social principles. The same thing can be said with reference to our many supporters within the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Time and time again staunch members of the LDS church have contacted us with warm expressions of their enthusiasm for our work, and on every occasion we have tried to make it clear that we welcome their friendship and appreciate their exemplary commitment to moral values. It is impossible to overestimate the value of such allies in the ongoing battle against secularism, “multiculturalism,” and amoral “political correctness.”
Why, then, have we come to regard our initial decision to feature this particular discussion with Glenn Beck on the CitizenLink Web site as an unfortunate miscalculation? For the simple reason that Mr. Beck's book “The Christmas Sweater”, which was the focal point of the interview, moves beyond the range of conservative social concerns and touches upon overtly theological themes. Herein lies the crux of our concern. Much as we respect and appreciate our friends in the LDS Church , it would be dishonest of us to conceal our firm conviction that at its heart, Mormon doctrine is incompatible with Christianity. While there are many forms of worship, modes of religious expression, and even a number of beliefs that Latter-day Saints hold in common with the various Christian denominations, the fact remains that the distinctions that make it unique are of an entirely different order from those that divide these other groups. At its deepest level, Mormon teaching about the nature of God and His Son Jesus Christ sets it apart, in a radical way, from orthodox Christendom.
I can sort of understand where Hall is coming from.
Later on in the article Jeffrey R. Holland is quoted by Scot Proctor:
We agree with our critics on at least that point—that such a formulation for divinity is truly incomprehensible. With such a confusing definition of God being imposed upon the church, little wonder that a fourth-century monk cried out, “Woe is me! They have taken my God away from me, … and I know not whom to adore or to address.” 2 How are we to trust, love, worship, to say nothing of strive to be like, One who is incomprehensible and unknowable? What of Jesus's prayer to His Father in Heaven that “this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent”? 3
It is not our purpose to demean any person's belief nor the doctrine of any religion. We extend to all the same respect for their doctrine that we are asking for ours. (That, too, is an article of our faith.) But if one says we are not Christians because we do not hold a fourth- or fifth-century view of the Godhead, then what of those first Christian Saints, many of whom were eyewitnesses of the living Christ, who did not hold such a view either?
Proctor adds:
The Prophet Joseph Smith taught that in order for us to “exercise faith in God unto life and salvation” we needed to have “a correct idea of his character, perfections, and attributes.”
In other words, as far as understanding the nature of God, Christianity is a rudderless ship sailing in deep fog, and we know what the pre-1990 temple ceremony contained as far as mocking mainstream Christianity for believing in a God "who is everywhere and nowhere".
I've always felt that Evangelical/Christian arguments about this were trivial, but I can actually see Ron Hall's point of view. And if "understanding the nature of God" is so important, might they not be justifiably wary of the Mormon concept of deity being promoted as "truth", while the traditional Christian one shoved into the background as "fog" and "incomprehensible"?
Perhaps Chris Salmon and Chris Smith (along with others) would like to weigh into this, I'd be interested to hear their opinions.
Is Ron Hall being melodramatic and overly sensitive, or does he have a point?
Note the ad: