I found it ironic that the article entitled "Who would pass up a free donut" (August issue) was opposite the article entitled "The ultimate blasphemy about Jesus." I realize that the story about the donut is not the ultimate blasphemy-but it does come close. Here is why:
The story is Mormon in origin and theology. It trivializes salvation by likening it to a donut, and Christ's atoning work on the cross by likening it to a boy doing pushups-a boy who did not know what he was doing. Christ did what no man can do and He definitely knew what He was doing. Christ's atonement is trivialized since a donut is something a person can gain for himself; salvation is not. Further, a donut is something that people can refuse without penalty, whereas the elect will receive Christ, and the reprobate will suffer the eternal torments of God's wrath, not merely missing a sugar buzz.
I realize that no illustration is perfect, but this one is so far off the mark of the doctrine of the atonement that it should be rejected, rather than reprinted. When this one came to me via email, I took several minutes to read it, refute it, and warn our congregation against such unbiblical "email theology."
Errol Hale, Shiloh Community Church
Editor's response: Your point that the story has a Mormon origin is merely possible, not certain. We believed-and still believe- the story carried a tremendous message about our Savior dying for all, though many would refuse the gift.