Stephen E. Robinson's Believing Christ

I imagine most of you have read some if not all of Robinson's book. I just finished it and while I was unsure of it for most of the time I was reading it, I think I now agree with him. The book is short and would be a quick read if you have a couple of uninterrupted hours--and if you do, lucky you. I read most if while brushing my teeth and in 5-10 minute spurts as they became available. I do a lot of my reading that way, in fact.

So, why was I unsure about the book. Let me quote a portion that felt incorrect to me at first. "Taken together, Christ and I make up a new creature. The old creature, the imperfect me, ceases to exist, and a glorious new creature, a perfect partnership, takes its place. Taken together as a single entity, the two of us, Christ and I, are perfect. I do not mean (this is absolutely crucial!) that we can become perfect later on. I mean that from the moment the partnership is formed in good faith, from the moment we have sincere faith in Christ, sincerely repent of our sins, and receive baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost--from this moment the partnership is celestial. The merits of the Senior Partner make it so. True, this is not individual perfection, which will indeed come later (much later), rather it is perfection-in-Christ (see Moro. 10-32-33), through which we receive the benefits of our partner's merits. Nevertheless, from this moment the kingdom is ours, provided that we maintain the partnership by abiding in the gospel covenant. (See 3 N. 27:16, 19-21) [Emphasis in the original]

Does that seem odd to anyone else? He continues to make this point, that once we've entered the covenant, we no longer need to strive for perfection--at least as far as our worthiness in God's eyes. We can't perfect ourselves and we don't need to. We are already perfect in Christ. Having said this, however, he goes on to point out that to remain in the covenant--to avoid falling from grace--we need to give our best effort.

I'd be interested in hearing what everyone else thinks of the topic--and, if you've read the book, what you think of it in general. If you own it and haven't read it in a while, I'd appreciate if you'd re-read it and share your thoughts about it with on. (It's only 125 small pages)

A couple things that this book helped me recognize. 1. Christ, because of his immortal Father had control over when he died. I knew this. I always understood it to be taught in reference to the fact that he gave up his life--no one took it from him. However, it also means that he was able to choose not to die while suffering the atonement--something that would have killed any other person. Because of this power, he was able to live through infinite suffering. 2. In the sacrament prayers, as we renew our baptismal covenants, we promise to take upon us the name of Christ, always remember him, and keep his commandments--or, at least, that's what I always thought we were covenanting. With this understanding, I renew my covenant, I am forgiven of my sins. I'm am brought back to the state of purity (free from the stains of sin) that I was in when I was baptized. I stay that way until I sin again (which sometimes is a matter of only seconds), and then I am impure. However, I firmly believe that if I die during the week, the sins that I committed since the last time took the sacrament won't be held against me any more than those that I committed before then. But, how can that be? I haven't been forgiven of those sins until I take the sacrament, right? What makes more sense is that I still have been forgiven. I have been forgiven of all my sins as long as I remain in the covenant that I have made. And what was that covenant? "That they are willing to take upon them..." I'm willing, but sometimes I weak. I want to keep the commandments, all the time, but sometimes I don't. As long as I "endure to the end" with the right attitude--a broken heart and contrite spirit--I am still in the covenant even though I make mistakes.

What do you all think?