Hello (name withheld by request),
Thanks for visiting our website, and for writing. Before our own departure from the church, we had been part of the Restoration Branch movement as well. We are well acquainted with the turmoil this causes in a variety of relationships. We applaud your willingness to stand for truth, in the face of opposition. Please pardon me for taking so long to respond. I’ve been putting in very long hours at work, and I’m also trying to get my book ready for a 2nd edition printing.
"Is Samuel the Lamanite in the Bible?" Your 11 year old daughter's question indeed highlights the difficult period you are in right now. The sad reality is that Joseph Smith mixed the truth of Christ and the Bible with his own lie. That's what makes his church a "psuedo-Christian" cult. At first glance it bears some similarity with genuine Christianity, but when examined closely it is exposed as a fraud. Your daughter's question is quite understandable. And now I need to tell you something you may not enjoy hearing. We have known a number of people who have left Joseph Smith's churches and joined genuine Christianity. And I've often seen them do a 'mental check' when a familiar quote has come to mind or has been brought up in conversation. So what is that 'mental check?' They are trying to remember where the quote came from. Is it from the Bible, or is it a carryover from their Joseph Smith days, from one of his books? Sometimes this happens for years. Perhaps it will never stop altogether, though it may subside as time goes on. It's quite unnerving to question your own recollections, or those of others. But one thing is certain: you will be very sensitive to correct doctrine from now on. You have been burned once. You are going to be careful you do not get burned again. You will be much more sensitive to doctrine than Christians who do not share your past.
You say it feels like you are starting from scratch. It's really worse than that. You would be better off if it were that easy. As it is, you have to unlearn a large body of scripture and doctrine, as well as learn the right thing. And you have to know how to tell the difference between the good and the bad. It's somewhat like learning to type at the age of 49, as I did. You have to break old habits, which to some degree are comfortable and familiar, replacing them with new, better ones. As I type this letter, I'm doing so the new way. In fact, it feels strange anymore to revert back to 'hunting and pecking.' And I now like the new way more, though it took some getting use to. And a whole lot of discipline at first. God loves you so much He was not willing to let you remain in heresy. He has drawn you out of that mess in order draw you closer to Himself. You must trust Him to complete the work He has already started in you. And He is faithful--He will do it!
Forgive me for getting a little 'preachy,' but I felt you might need to hear some of that.
Your actual question has to do with "Christ preaching in the prison house to those who have died without knowledge of the gospel." This apparent chance of salvation after death appeals to you as being fair, but you are concerned that it is not the view of Protestantism. You have an understandable concern. However, the fact of the matter is that there is no single Protestant view of this doctrine--there are at least three differing views of the fate of the unevangelized. And each of these views has had a broad array of notable adherents throughout the ages, including theologians and pastors across broad denominational lines. Even today there remains a variety of opinion within denominations. The view which does seem to get more 'air time,' however, is the view you are concerned about. It is called 'Exclusivism' or 'Restrictivism.' In a 'nutshell,' that view claims that each human needs to have a conscious saving relationship with Christ in this lifetime in order to inherit eternal salvation in the life to come. Those who have never heard the gospel are simply left out. But it is important to understand that there are at least two other formal viewpoints, 'Inclusivism' and 'Post-Mortem Evangelization' or 'Divine Perseverance.' 'Inclusivism' believes that salvation comes only through Christ, but that a person may end up being saved without consciously knowing Christ in this lifetime. That view holds that God will judge each person according to their response to the degree of 'light' which was available to them through the created order, conscience and human culture. 'Postmortem Evangelization' or 'Divine Perseverance' holds that people may consciously accept Christ in the life to come in response to hearing the gospel there. This last view is actually similar to the RLDS view you mentioned.
It is important to note that the fate of the unevangelized is but one of a variety of theological issues for which there does not appear to be only one conclusive answer. In this present age we struggle with limited scriptural information and even more limited capacity to completely grasp the Holy and Eternal God. He gives us enough information to respond to Him in faith. But we shouldn't be so presumptuous to believe that we have figured Him all out. He is far too big and Holy for that. He has reserved a complete knowledge of Himself for the coming age--not this one. That sometimes leaves us in a nagging state of tension on some issues, like the one at hand. But please note that Christians do not break fellowship over this issue, though they may share differing opinions. There are perfectly valid points made by adherents of each view. And weaknesses as well. We don't let our limited understanding divide us.
At this point I would like to recommend some books you might finding interesting and helpful. The first one deals with the topic at hand, and is entitled What About Those Who Have Never Heard: Three Views on the Destiny of the Unevangelized, edited by John Sanders and published by InterVarsity Press. There are actually three authors, each a theologian, who explain each of the three views I mentioned above. The other two then offer comment on the view described, so there are actually nine essays in all. My wife and I have read this book multiple times. It is very good.
A second book I would like to recommend is How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, by Gordon Fee & Douglas Stuart and published by Zondervan. I feel that this book is actually a condensed seminary course of study—and a whole lot cheaper! The authors guide you through the variety of genres which comprise the Bible, and what to look for in each genre. They also talk about the development of the various translations and the strengths and weaknesses of each. And they teach you to be a demanding reader, to ask questions of the text, and how to read passages contextually.
A third book is A Guide to Selecting and Using Bible Commentaries, by Douglas Stuart and published by Word Publishing. The author is a respected scholar from Gordon Conwell seminary near Boston. He surveys various types of commentaries and offers opinions on the very best commentaries for each book of the Bible. I use this volume each time I buy a commentary. It is priceless to me.
A fourth, and final book, is 1 Peter, by J. Ramsey Michaels and published by Word Publishing. This is a serious and scholarly commentary on 1 Peter. Mr. Michaels includes several pages of dense scrutiny of the passage on the ‘prison house.’ It is incredibly insightful, but heady. Tackle this one when you’re feeling particularly energetic!
God bless you, xxxxxxxx. I hope this helps. We would love to hear from you as your journey continues to unfold. Please feel free to write anytime.
Paul Trask
