What do you think?
The Theological Foundations of the Mormon Religion
A Philosopher, Sterling M. McMurrin (1914-96) appreciated the similarities between Mormonism and Hellenistic Christianity. For instance, Church Fathers of the fifth century admired Plato, who taught that there is one God, coexistent with such eternal entities as Justice and Love-to which Joseph Smith added Priesthood and Church. Where Augustine modified Plato, Mormonism would tend to side with his critic, the Stoic-leaning Pelagius. In this broad context, what is Mormonism's contribution to the overall pursuit of life's fundamental, ontological questions? Herein lies McMurrin's intent-an invitation to join him on a wide-ranging search for purpose. He finds his church's synthesis of heresy and orthodoxy to be refreshing and impressive in this light, in its treatment of evil, sin, and free will. Belief in a personal God may run counter to traditional faith, but it is nonetheless emotionally satisfying and accessible to the human imagination. McMurrin was E. E. Ericksen Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at the University of Utah and U.S. Commissioner of Education under President John F. Kennedy. Of his nine books, Theological Foundations is considered his masterpiece. The present edition includes his earlier essay, "The Philosophical Foundations of Mormon Theology," with a biographical introduction by Deep Springs College president L. Jackson Newell and a glossary of terms by Dr. McMurrin's daughter, Trudy McMurrin. Sterling M. McMurrin was Academic Vice President and dean of the graduate school at the University of Utah, a Visiting Scholar at Columbia University and the Union Theological Seminary, and a Ford Fellow in philosophy at Princeton. In addition to being U.S. Commissioner of Education (see above), he served as US Envoy to Iran. He was the author of Education and Freedom; Religion, Reason and Truth; and co-author of Contemporary Philosophy; A History of Philosophy; Matters of Conscience; and Toward Understanding the New Testament. He contributed to The Autobiography of B. H. Roberts and Memories and Reflections. L. Jackson Newell is the former dean of Liberal Education at the University of Utah. He is the co-author of Creating Distinctiveness, Matters of Conscience, and A Study of Professors; a contributor to Neither White nor Black; Personal Voices; Religion, Feminism, and Freedom of Conscience; and The Wilderness of Faith; and is a past coeditor of Dialogue. He has received the CASE Professor of the Year and Joseph Katz Distinguished Leadership in Education awards. Currently he is president of Deep Springs College.
151 pages, Paperback
First published April 6, 1965
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
July 26, 2024
I found God reading Sterling McMurrin.
On a more serious note, however, almost seventy-five years after these essays were first prepared (for a series of addresses at The Ohio State University, I believe), Sterling McMurrin’s work on Mormon theology and philosophy remains the best primer we have available on the subject. What is cruel is that this book is essentially all he ever wrote on the subject. If only he had expanded, and elaborated later on. And if only, frankly, the institutionalists had treated him better than we did, frankly. To borrow from McMurrin’s judgment of B.H. Roberts and apply it herewith, this book is “not the great book on Mormon theology, though it is the greatest.”
On a more serious note, however, almost seventy-five years after these essays were first prepared (for a series of addresses at The Ohio State University, I believe), Sterling McMurrin’s work on Mormon theology and philosophy remains the best primer we have available on the subject. What is cruel is that this book is essentially all he ever wrote on the subject. If only he had expanded, and elaborated later on. And if only, frankly, the institutionalists had treated him better than we did, frankly. To borrow from McMurrin’s judgment of B.H. Roberts and apply it herewith, this book is “not the great book on Mormon theology, though it is the greatest.”
November 15, 2020
First I’ll mention I still don’t understand much of what I’ve just read. This book delves into varying subjects regarding the philosophical aspects of Mormonism and does a good job of placing it in context surrounded by other religions. It talks about the finite vs absolute god discussion as well as pantheism and the existence of evil.
December 14, 2021
Lucid, compelling, careful, thorough examination of the Mormon position on a broad range of metaphysical questions. Not a complete working out of Mormon theology by any means, but a plausible sketch of its foundations and a great jumping off point. (I'm hoping to find others who've picked up where he left off. Any suggested reading?)
March 2, 2008
Sterling M. McMurrin, the U.S. Commissioner of Education for two years during the administration of President John F. Kennedy (see Matters of Conscience), was one of the most intelligent and articulate persons I have ever had the privilege of hearing speak. I fed a growing love of philosophy just by looking up, as a teenager, the terms that McMurrin assumes that the reader of this book will know. His actual arguments about the philosophical implications of LDS theology are brilliant but now somewhat dated, assuming as they do that there was a reasonably stable position on theological issues. It's now fairly clear that Joseph Smith's positions on both theology and philosophy evolved over time. Nevertheless, McMurrin's explanations and commentaries are not to be missed, either by the student of Mormon thought or by anyone who wants to stretch his or her mind.
March 30, 2009
Although this book gets a fair amount of grief it will always hold a special place for me because it was one of the first books I read which got me interested in philosophy and explained things at a level I could understand without yet knowing any of the philosophical jargon.
September 13, 2026
IS MORMONISM A ‘KIND OF NATURALISTIC, HUMANISTIC THEISM’?
Sterling McMurrin (1914-1996) was a Mormon theologian and philosopher, who taught for a number of years in the LDS Church Educational System as a seminary teacher, and later as a professor and Dean of the graduate school at the University of Utah.
He wrote in the Foreword to this 1965 book, “The most interesting thing about Mormon theology is that it incorporates a liberal doctrine of man and a radically unorthodox concept of God within the general framework of historic Christian fundamentalism… The intention of this essay is to exhibit the distinctive character of Mormon theology and resides especially in the finitistic concept of God and the denial of the traditional doctrines of original sin and salvation by grace.
“It is not my purpose here to present a systematic statement of Mormon doctrine or either to justify or criticize it. Rather I have composed a comparative commentary that is intended simply to differentiate Mormon doctrine from the classical Christian theology as that is set forth by the major theologians or expressed in certain of the historical symbols of the Christian faith… Modern Mormonism is a modern Pelagianism in a Puritan religion. Mormonism is a Judaic-like community religion grounded in the Puritan moral doctrine that the vocation of man is to create the kingdom of God. Its fundamentalism is rooted in the biblical literalism native to American religion. Its heresy is the denial of the dogma of original sin, a heresy that exhibits both the disintegration of modern Protestantism and the impact of 19th century liberalism on the character of American sectarianism.”
In Chapter 1, he states, “the naturalistic disposition of Mormonism is found in the denial of the traditional conception of the supernatural. It is typical of Mormon writers to insist that even God is natural rather than supernatural… This naturalistic quality of Mormon philosophy is without question related to several facets of the attitude, practice, and thought of the Mormon people: the high evaluation placed on the human body, the essentially positive attitude towards sex, the affirmative estimate of human character and human accomplishment, the obvious this-worldliness of the religion with its denial of the distinction between the sacred and the secular, and a traditional enthusiasm for natural science. It is perhaps not entirely inaccurate to describe Mormonism as a kind of naturalistic, humanistic theism.” (Pg. 2-3)
He continues, “The materialism of Mormonism is not in any way a denial of the reality of the spirit or of heavenly beings. Mormonism teaches a strict numerical dualism of the spirit and body; though they are both material, they are two different entities.” (Pg. 6)
He notes, “It would be an error to suppose that Mormon theological doctrine is a deduction from metaphysical principles. Certainly nothing could be further from the truth. Mormonism is basically a dogmatic religion grounded in the claims of revelation. But it is clear that Mormon theology has a foundation in a set of ideas on the nature of things and that [assumes] some acquaintance with those ideas on the nature of things… Although historically the theology was not derived from the metaphysics, the metaphysics is logically prior to the theology.” (Pg. 18)
He asserts, “God is a being among beings rather than BEING as such or the ground of being, and that he is therefore finite rather than absolute.” (Pg. 29)
Mormonism “denies eternity in the sense of timelessness, describing God as subject to both time and space… a view that has always widely prevailed in popular religion and that is central to the Mormon conception that God is a material being… God is placed therefore not above or without, but within the ongoing processes of the universe.” (Pg. 39)
He acknowledges, “it is commonly held by the Mormon theologians that the cosmological and teleological arguments have value. Their value, however, is not that they are firm and conclusive proofs of God’s existence but rather are rational supports of the claims of revelation. Both the existence and nature of God are known by revelation only. In this way the primacy of revelation is presented.” (Pg. 48)
He states, “for Mormon theology, notwithstanding the statements of some Mormon theologians, the good of Adam’s transgression lay not primarily in the setting of the stage for the abundant grace of Christ, but in the implementation of the moral freedom of human souls.” (Pg. 74)
He summarizes, “Mormon theology is young and unsophisticated and is not overencumbered with creed and official pronouncements. Its structure has been virtually untouched by serious and competent effort to achieve internal consistency or exact definition… It is in great need of a definition of the relation of reason to revelation that will preserve the intellectual integrity of the Mormon people and encourage them in an honest and courageous pursuit of truth.” (Pg. 112)
McMurrin will be ‘too liberal’ for some LDS members, but others may agree with his approach.
Sterling McMurrin (1914-1996) was a Mormon theologian and philosopher, who taught for a number of years in the LDS Church Educational System as a seminary teacher, and later as a professor and Dean of the graduate school at the University of Utah.
He wrote in the Foreword to this 1965 book, “The most interesting thing about Mormon theology is that it incorporates a liberal doctrine of man and a radically unorthodox concept of God within the general framework of historic Christian fundamentalism… The intention of this essay is to exhibit the distinctive character of Mormon theology and resides especially in the finitistic concept of God and the denial of the traditional doctrines of original sin and salvation by grace.
“It is not my purpose here to present a systematic statement of Mormon doctrine or either to justify or criticize it. Rather I have composed a comparative commentary that is intended simply to differentiate Mormon doctrine from the classical Christian theology as that is set forth by the major theologians or expressed in certain of the historical symbols of the Christian faith… Modern Mormonism is a modern Pelagianism in a Puritan religion. Mormonism is a Judaic-like community religion grounded in the Puritan moral doctrine that the vocation of man is to create the kingdom of God. Its fundamentalism is rooted in the biblical literalism native to American religion. Its heresy is the denial of the dogma of original sin, a heresy that exhibits both the disintegration of modern Protestantism and the impact of 19th century liberalism on the character of American sectarianism.”
In Chapter 1, he states, “the naturalistic disposition of Mormonism is found in the denial of the traditional conception of the supernatural. It is typical of Mormon writers to insist that even God is natural rather than supernatural… This naturalistic quality of Mormon philosophy is without question related to several facets of the attitude, practice, and thought of the Mormon people: the high evaluation placed on the human body, the essentially positive attitude towards sex, the affirmative estimate of human character and human accomplishment, the obvious this-worldliness of the religion with its denial of the distinction between the sacred and the secular, and a traditional enthusiasm for natural science. It is perhaps not entirely inaccurate to describe Mormonism as a kind of naturalistic, humanistic theism.” (Pg. 2-3)
He continues, “The materialism of Mormonism is not in any way a denial of the reality of the spirit or of heavenly beings. Mormonism teaches a strict numerical dualism of the spirit and body; though they are both material, they are two different entities.” (Pg. 6)
He notes, “It would be an error to suppose that Mormon theological doctrine is a deduction from metaphysical principles. Certainly nothing could be further from the truth. Mormonism is basically a dogmatic religion grounded in the claims of revelation. But it is clear that Mormon theology has a foundation in a set of ideas on the nature of things and that [assumes] some acquaintance with those ideas on the nature of things… Although historically the theology was not derived from the metaphysics, the metaphysics is logically prior to the theology.” (Pg. 18)
He asserts, “God is a being among beings rather than BEING as such or the ground of being, and that he is therefore finite rather than absolute.” (Pg. 29)
Mormonism “denies eternity in the sense of timelessness, describing God as subject to both time and space… a view that has always widely prevailed in popular religion and that is central to the Mormon conception that God is a material being… God is placed therefore not above or without, but within the ongoing processes of the universe.” (Pg. 39)
He acknowledges, “it is commonly held by the Mormon theologians that the cosmological and teleological arguments have value. Their value, however, is not that they are firm and conclusive proofs of God’s existence but rather are rational supports of the claims of revelation. Both the existence and nature of God are known by revelation only. In this way the primacy of revelation is presented.” (Pg. 48)
He states, “for Mormon theology, notwithstanding the statements of some Mormon theologians, the good of Adam’s transgression lay not primarily in the setting of the stage for the abundant grace of Christ, but in the implementation of the moral freedom of human souls.” (Pg. 74)
He summarizes, “Mormon theology is young and unsophisticated and is not overencumbered with creed and official pronouncements. Its structure has been virtually untouched by serious and competent effort to achieve internal consistency or exact definition… It is in great need of a definition of the relation of reason to revelation that will preserve the intellectual integrity of the Mormon people and encourage them in an honest and courageous pursuit of truth.” (Pg. 112)
McMurrin will be ‘too liberal’ for some LDS members, but others may agree with his approach.
January 15, 2024
This book frustrated me a great deal. It is certainly excellent, and the evident passion of McMurrin for Mormonism shines through with a clean, sincere light. Still, as someone moderately-read in philosophy, and with a lifetime of experience with Mormonism, I had some serious issues with this text that prevent me from giving it a full-throated recommendation.
First, while McMurrin is clearly an expert on both Mormonism and proficient in the larger theological fields which he frequently defers for comparison, his analysis struck me as little more than "academically standard." What I mean is that his familiarity with all relevant material seemed no less impressive than that which is to be expected from the works of protestant theological authorities of all stripes. Nothing in this text struck me as elevating him above or beyond what is considered standard (if undoubtedly rigorous and effective) fair. The main advantage McMurrin has in this respect is that, in the realms of Mormon theology, he has little-to-no competition. You would be hard pressed to find anyone who has sufficient familiarity with standard theological discourse and Mormon theology to do this topic justice. Credit where credit is due.
What I found harder to forgive was the many moments his agenda detracted from the text. In reading this book, I increasingly got the feeling that this was a text meant as manifesto and evangelizing tract for the eyes of liberal religionists everywhere. As such, Mormonism felt like it was being sold, as much as explicated, with the side effect of occasionally disingenuous descriptions that stand in sharp contrast with his normally effective analysis. McMurrin is correct in arguing that Mormon theology has fundamentals compatible with, even manifesting, radical liberal theology, but that is not the case in every particular. You wouldn't know it from his writing.
To list some prominent examples, McMurrin characterizes Mormonism as 'materialist,' positioning a dualism where the 'spirit' stands as a more refined category of matter. Well and good, this is certainly radical. He then proceeds to position Mormons as believers as kinds of 'naturalism,' as opposed to the 'supernaturalism' of popular Christian theology, so that 'spirit matter' still operates according to material laws, even if those material laws remain unknown (or unknowable) to the physical body. No magic here! This seems to me to be a patent misrepresentation of naturalism, for which physical relations and scientific inquiry are king, as well as a very limited reading of Mormon thought, which has repeatedly emphasized the supremacy and inaccessibility of 'spirit matter' from 'physical matter.' This even McMurrin latter seems to acknowledge when he concludes his book by saying, "[Mormonism] must reconcile its supernaturalism with its own naturalistic and humanistic propensities." Such a qualification of Mormonism as both 'supernatural' and 'natural' was notably missing in his more extensive previous analysis.
Also notably absent from his fundamentals is any discussion of the epistemology of theology of Mormonism. This was also neglected in his 'Philosophical Foundations,' but this becomes a much more obvious omission here. I do not think it is controversial to say that, as a revealed religion, reason and empirics are subordinate to revelation in the economy of Mormon knowledge. What's more, this revelation, at least in its most intense and detailed nature, must be funneled through credentials and forms uniquely abiding in Mormonism, thus producing a superior inspired theology. While revelation is not unfamiliar to theologians, this all sounds much less radical and presents as an exclusion of other liberal discourse from the philosophies at hand. That these foundations were not included detracts from the fullness of McMurrin's descriptions. Some passing nods to 'revelation' are insufficient corrections to this.
Also glossed were details including the theological survey of heaven, with it's radical divinity, as well as the legalist/literalist/apocalyptic strains in Mormon thinking. These were briefly mentioned as opponents to be rhetorically defeated in his analysis, with as much economy as possible.
Having got this all out of my system, I will conclude that the vast majority of the content in this text is good. If compared to the field of alternative surveys of Mormon philosophy, I would give it 6 stars. As it stands, compared to contemporary theology by other writers, it is a good survey of the subject from someone who cares a great deal about the future and soul of his faith tradition, and it's hard to be mad at that.
First, while McMurrin is clearly an expert on both Mormonism and proficient in the larger theological fields which he frequently defers for comparison, his analysis struck me as little more than "academically standard." What I mean is that his familiarity with all relevant material seemed no less impressive than that which is to be expected from the works of protestant theological authorities of all stripes. Nothing in this text struck me as elevating him above or beyond what is considered standard (if undoubtedly rigorous and effective) fair. The main advantage McMurrin has in this respect is that, in the realms of Mormon theology, he has little-to-no competition. You would be hard pressed to find anyone who has sufficient familiarity with standard theological discourse and Mormon theology to do this topic justice. Credit where credit is due.
What I found harder to forgive was the many moments his agenda detracted from the text. In reading this book, I increasingly got the feeling that this was a text meant as manifesto and evangelizing tract for the eyes of liberal religionists everywhere. As such, Mormonism felt like it was being sold, as much as explicated, with the side effect of occasionally disingenuous descriptions that stand in sharp contrast with his normally effective analysis. McMurrin is correct in arguing that Mormon theology has fundamentals compatible with, even manifesting, radical liberal theology, but that is not the case in every particular. You wouldn't know it from his writing.
To list some prominent examples, McMurrin characterizes Mormonism as 'materialist,' positioning a dualism where the 'spirit' stands as a more refined category of matter. Well and good, this is certainly radical. He then proceeds to position Mormons as believers as kinds of 'naturalism,' as opposed to the 'supernaturalism' of popular Christian theology, so that 'spirit matter' still operates according to material laws, even if those material laws remain unknown (or unknowable) to the physical body. No magic here! This seems to me to be a patent misrepresentation of naturalism, for which physical relations and scientific inquiry are king, as well as a very limited reading of Mormon thought, which has repeatedly emphasized the supremacy and inaccessibility of 'spirit matter' from 'physical matter.' This even McMurrin latter seems to acknowledge when he concludes his book by saying, "[Mormonism] must reconcile its supernaturalism with its own naturalistic and humanistic propensities." Such a qualification of Mormonism as both 'supernatural' and 'natural' was notably missing in his more extensive previous analysis.
Also notably absent from his fundamentals is any discussion of the epistemology of theology of Mormonism. This was also neglected in his 'Philosophical Foundations,' but this becomes a much more obvious omission here. I do not think it is controversial to say that, as a revealed religion, reason and empirics are subordinate to revelation in the economy of Mormon knowledge. What's more, this revelation, at least in its most intense and detailed nature, must be funneled through credentials and forms uniquely abiding in Mormonism, thus producing a superior inspired theology. While revelation is not unfamiliar to theologians, this all sounds much less radical and presents as an exclusion of other liberal discourse from the philosophies at hand. That these foundations were not included detracts from the fullness of McMurrin's descriptions. Some passing nods to 'revelation' are insufficient corrections to this.
Also glossed were details including the theological survey of heaven, with it's radical divinity, as well as the legalist/literalist/apocalyptic strains in Mormon thinking. These were briefly mentioned as opponents to be rhetorically defeated in his analysis, with as much economy as possible.
Having got this all out of my system, I will conclude that the vast majority of the content in this text is good. If compared to the field of alternative surveys of Mormon philosophy, I would give it 6 stars. As it stands, compared to contemporary theology by other writers, it is a good survey of the subject from someone who cares a great deal about the future and soul of his faith tradition, and it's hard to be mad at that.
August 24, 2018
Just reread this.
My husband and I read this when investigating the church. It was fascinating and a good influence at the time. But the author totally misses the point. Latter day saints do not do theology. Our religion is based on revelation. I would no longer recommend this book to anyone.
Good thing is that it has me rereading the essay "Pragmatism" and that is very well written and worth it.
My husband and I read this when investigating the church. It was fascinating and a good influence at the time. But the author totally misses the point. Latter day saints do not do theology. Our religion is based on revelation. I would no longer recommend this book to anyone.
Good thing is that it has me rereading the essay "Pragmatism" and that is very well written and worth it.
February 11, 2021
I'm glad I read this one on my iPad using the Kindle App, with its ability to tell me the definition of words by simply touching them. Otherwise, I would have been totally lost. This is a dense, challenging read, but I gained new insights on my religion and the beliefs of others.
January 20, 2022
A lot is great. Its significance, though, is more striking than its quality. There are some misses (the middle third of the book felt notably weak) but this remains worthy of consideration more than five and a half decades later.
May 9, 2013
This is the go-to book for a philosophically-minded person who wants to know about Mormon theology. Before I read this I don't think I really appreciated how radically different Mormon cosmology is from traditional Christian cosmology. He was a non-believing cultural Mormon, but he understands the radical implications of Mormon theology a lot more clearly than almost any believer that I can think of.
January 2, 2014
I read this before my mission - I think when still in high school - very early 70s. The book strongly affected my views toward Mormonism and secondarily toward philosophy. The language was often over my head, but I found the ideas compelling; reading it strengthened my young testimony.
Years later I learned of McMurrin's agnosticism and his long history defending the Church - and I came to a new appreciation of both him and the Church.
Years later I learned of McMurrin's agnosticism and his long history defending the Church - and I came to a new appreciation of both him and the Church.
June 10, 2016
A great book. Nitpicky, dense, and insightful. It oughta be required reading for Mormons. McMurrin contextualizes Mormonism within the overall sphere of Christianity, pointing out its fundamental disagreements and counterpoints to both Catholicism and mainstream Protestantism. And I'm amused that it was one of our most famous disaffected members who finally put into a coherent form all of the doctrines and ideas that makes Mormonism so unique and satisfying.
September 10, 2012
Going through it this time looking for information on the Classical "Omni" attributes of God. Specifically this search deals with Omniscience and how that might affect space/time and the idea of free choice. All Good stuff. I will be publishing my finished article in the Deseret News dumpster behind my house.
Big UP to Sterling! I love you man!
Big UP to Sterling! I love you man!
July 19, 2011
Mormons do not fully appreciate the extremely strong metaphysical position that they have. This book shows the uniqueness and strength of the metaphysical foundations of Mormon theology. It avoids all of the philosophical problems that traditional Christianity has always struggled with.
March 1, 2008
Remarkably naive, to be quite honest.
March 19, 2014
Where are the Mormon theologians of our day that can match what McMurrin was doing? I'd welcome them.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews