The Evangelical Dictionary of World Religions

LAMANITES. The Lamanites are an alleged rebellious group of people who are the principal antagonists in the Book of Mormon. They are descended from the wicked Laman, who is said to have left Israel in order to sail to the American continent with his father, Lehi, in the sixth century BC. The Book of Mormon details how Laman plotted to kill his righteous brother the prophet Nephi and how the Lamanites eventually destroyed the Nephites in the fifth century AD. Controversially, the Book of Mormon also claims that the Lamanites were cursed with a “skin of darkness” due to their sinfulness, while the Nephites were “white and delightsome.” Recent editions of the Book of Mormon have been changed to say “pure” instead of “white.” The Mormons generally believe that American Indians are Lamanite descendants (while certain Mormon leaders have called all indigenous peoples “Lamanites”).

Bibliography. R. Abanes, One Nation under God: A History of the Mormon Church; R. E. Lee, What Do Mormons Believe?

E. Johnson

LAO TZU / LAOZI. Lao Tzu is the common name of the acclaimed Chinese founder of Taoism. Lao Tzu or Lao-tse is an honorific title meaning “old man” or “old master”; the spelling Laozi is preferred academically.

Lao Tzu’s earliest biography appears in the Shi-Chi (historical records), composed around 90 BC. It says he was born Li Erh or Li Dan in 605 BC in a village now called Honan. The account contains both credible narrative and miracle stories, such as his mother conceiving him after seeing a falling star and carrying him in her womb for sixty-two years until his birth.

According to tradition, Lao Tzu was keeper of the imperial archives at Zhou. There he met Confucius, who twice sought his counsel on certain rituals. In his old age, Lao Tzu left the kingdom when he recognized its imminent collapse. As he was traveling to the mountains, the keeper of the pass insisted that he write down his wisdom, which he did in five thousand Chinese characters. They became two books, the Tao Ching and the Te Ching, now joined as the Tao Te Ching (scholars believe these books were composed in the third century BC). Though he was never seen again, he supposedly lived a very long life. Over the centuries, an accretion of legend and hero worship grew around Lao Tzu, and by the third century AD he had been deified as a Buddha, one of the Three Heavenly Worthies, and the supreme being of some Taoist sects.

Bibliography. J. M. Boltz, “Laozi,” in Encyclopedia of Religion, 2nd ed., edited by L. Jones; M. J. O’Neal and J. S. Jones, “Laozi,” in World Religions: Biographies, edited by N. Schlager and J. Weisblatt; J. F. Pas, Historical Dictionary of Taoism.

E. Pement

LEGALISM FROM A CHRISTIAN PERSPECTIVE. In general legalism (also “nomism,” from Greek, nomos, law) denotes the belief that morality and/or salvation consist(s) in the observance of laws. Closer inspection, however, reveals at least four forms of legalism.

Biblical Legalism. First, biblical legalism stands as a corrective to antinomianism, the view that grace frees the believer from obligation to law (which in practice usually results in antinomians claiming they are under no behavioral or moral restrictions). Jesus declared that he came not to abolish but to “fulfill” the Law (Matt. 5:17). The “law is a transcript of the holiness of God” (Strong, 875) and, even in believers, still has the force of exhortation, so “that by teaching, admonishing, rebuking, and correcting, it may fit and prepare us for every good work” (Calvin, II. 7.14). Thus many psalms express delight in the law; for example, “Your word is a lamp for my feet, a light on my path” (Ps. 119:105). Some forms of early Christian asceticism, especially popular in the postapostolic church, represent special applications of biblical legalism.

Theological or Ideal Legalism. Second, theological or ideal legalism advocates respect (even love) for law as the foundation of civilized society. In his Republic, for example, Plato defined the ideal state in terms of obedience to laws derived from the universal good. Similar sentiments can be traced throughout the cultures of ancient Greece and Rome. Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) conceived of morality as “conformity of actions to universal law as such,” expressed in the famous categorical imperative: “I ought never to act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law” (70).

Meritocratic Legalism. Third, Christians often embrace a kind of meritocratic legalism, even while holding intellectually to salvation by grace. Paul wrote Galatians to oppose this belief in the efficacy of law-keeping rather than (or in addition to) faith as a means to divine favor. “Having begun by the Spirit,” Paul asks, “are you now being perfected by the flesh?” (Gal. 3:3 NASB). The fourth-century Donatists exemplify the meritocratic form of legalism. There are strains of this kind of legalism today in parts of evangelicalism. They assert that doing certain activities, while not resulting in the loss of salvation per se, is always sinful for Christians. Conversely, avoiding these activities results in sanctification. While it is true the New Testament does preclude certain activities (e.g., the eating of blood, fornication, lying), these modern legalists add activities not precluded in the New Testament (e.g., dancing, drinking alcohol, entertainment).

Salvific Legalism. Finally, there is salvific legalism, such as characterized Pharisaic Judaism and diverse religious movements both ancient and modern, ranging from the rigidly ascetical Ebionites to modern moral progressivists, such as the Mormons. Every non-Christian or sub-Christian doctrine of salvation is “legalistic” in the narrow sense that the only alternative to salvation by grace is works-based autosoterism. But the term is more accurately applied to religious systems that consider strict observance of individual laws as the substance of moral life and equate this moral life with salvation. Such movements are often highly casuistic—that is, they formulate systems of rules to define obedience in specific cases. Legalistic systems thus tend not only to disconnect moral laws from any underlying unity but to eliminate distinctions between the laws themselves by making the mere act of observance supreme. Hence Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for failing to grasp the theological basis for Moses’s divorce legislation (Matt. 19:3–9). The “whole Law and the Prophets,” Jesus declared, is summarized by love of God and neighbor (Matt. 22:35–40 NASB; also Luke 18:18–22).

Bibliography. J. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, translated by Henry Beveridge; C. E. Ehrhardt, “Nomism,” in The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics; I. Kant, Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals; M. Luther, On Christian Liberty; A. H. Strong, Systematic Theology: A Compendium Designed for the Use of Theological Students.

C. R. Wells

LIBERAL CHRISTIANITY. Born in nineteenth-century post-Enlightenment Germany, liberalism marked a dramatic shift in prominent Christian theology. The diverse range of beliefs liberalism encompasses defies a tightly drawn definition.

German theologian Friedrich Schleiermacher redefined Christian theology by emphasizing religious experience over doctrine and feeling over objective truth. The authority and inspiration of Scripture were questioned, and doctrine became subject to the tests of experience and reason. Rudolf Bultmann’s “demythologization” of the New Testament contributed to the idea that the Bible was fallible and incapable of communicating with modern human beings. Through the years, liberalism has maintained one nonnegotiable, that of a nonliteral interpretation of Scripture.

Intent on relating faith through the confines of culture, liberalism modified or repressed the unique particulars of the Christian faith. Humanity’s condition as sinners was dismissed, replaced with a fervent optimism about humankind’s ability to imitate the moral and loving example of Jesus and attain perfection. Liberal thought abounded with hope that the kingdom of God could be established on earth through believers’ efforts. Good works took precedence over confessions and creeds, and liberalism connected with a social gospel to effect social change.

The belief that God is present in the world and in the cultural movements of history is an important tenet of Christian liberalism. Evolution was heralded as validation that God works through natural law. This belief led liberalism to seek out “universal” elements common to all belief systems and to embrace them. Liberalism still persists today, though its heady optimism was dispelled by two world wars and a waning popularity.

Bibliography. A. E. McGrath, A Passion for Truth: The Intellectual Coherence of Evangelicalism; B. M. G. Reardon, ed., Liberal Protestantism.

M. Stewart

LI CHI / LIJI. The Li Chi (also spelled Liji) is one of the five Confucian classics. It explains ritualized life according to Confucian values. This includes institutional and social customs, home discipline, royal regulations, dress, the theory of ceremonies and rituals, utensils used, the lives of Confucius and his disciples, and more. Much of the material is indeed ancient, but scholars think it was compiled during the Han Dynasty.

See also HINDUISM; SHAKTI; SHIVA; YONI

Bibliography. U. Becker and L. W. Garmer, The Continuum Encyclopedia of Symbols.

H. W. House

LITURGY. The word liturgy is from the Greek word leitourgia, which originally meant public duty and was used of the service to the state done by a citizen. It was the Greek word used in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible (the Septuagint, or LXX) to refer to the public service of priests in the temple. This religious meaning develops in New Testament times, and afterward, as the public service of the church. In this sense, the term comes to be used to describe the order or structure of worship. It deals with the way worship is conducted in different denominations. The oldest liturgies are those of the Coptic, the Eastern Orthodox, and the Roman Catholic Churches. In these churches, the priests play a key role, with the congregation as participants, in a divine act that brings them to God. The central act in these traditions is that of Communion or the Mass, which is performed by the priests with little input from the congregation. The Roman Catholic Church includes all of the public rites of the church as liturgy, while the Eastern Orthodox Church restricts the term to the Holy Eucharist.

Since the Reformation, Protestant Christians have developed their own unique forms of liturgy that stress the centrality of preaching and the role of the Bible in the service. Lutheran and Anglican churches have reformed the Roman Catholic liturgy largely on the basis of the works of the church fathers and other early liturgies. As they did so, their principle was to remove anything that they believed conflicted with a clear reading of Scripture but leave intact other practices that were supported by tradition. On the other hand, churches in the Calvinist and Baptist traditions reformed the liturgy in terms of only doing things that are clearly found in Scripture. In the nineteenth century, Roman Catholic–type liturgy was revived within the Anglican and some other Protestant churches. Today the Eastern Orthodox tradition appears to be influencing many evangelical Christians in their thoughts about liturgy.

One of the determining influences on the formation of traditional liturgies is the clear biblical injunction to remember what God has done (cf. Deut. 8:2) and the quest for spiritual roots (Josh. 4; Luke 11:29–32; Acts 7; Heb. 12). Consequently, Christians follow practices such as the observance of the church year, which is based on the life of Christ and celebrates things like Advent, the period leading up to the birth of Christ; Christmas, the birth of Christ; Lent, a time of personal reflection and repentance that remembers the temptations of Christ; and, of course, the central liturgical events of Holy Week and the death of Christ, followed by his triumphal resurrection and ascension. Following a regular pattern of Bible readings and recalling events from Scripture shape the worship of liturgical churches. This worship, they believe, develops a deep-seated piety and sense of the divine based on Scripture.

On the other hand, many evangelical churches of the Plymouth Brethren variety see such acts as “dead rituals” and reject them. Such churches claim to lack a ritual structure, although their liturgical critics argue that they have one that they simply fail to recognize.

Bibliography. W. K. Clark and C. Harris, Liturgy and Worship; D. G. Dix, The Shape of the Liturgy; C. Jones, G. Wainwright, and Edward Yarnold, The Study of Liturgy; C. Price and L. Weil, Liturgy for Living; P. Z. Strodach, The Church Year.

I. Hexham

LOGOS. This Greek word has a variety of meanings, including “word,” “reason,” “thought,” and “speech.” It is a significant theological term used by the apostle John, particularly in John 1:1 and 14 in reference to Jesus. Though John was using the Greek language, the idea of an intermediary between God and humans was well developed in Jewish thought. The term memra, found in Aramaic Jewish writings and meaning “word,” was thought to be this intermediary. By Jesus’s time, the Jewish philosopher Philo had linked the idea of the Jewish memra and the Greek logos. The Greeks thought of logos as an “abstract principle of reason exhibited by an orderly universe”(White, 2.2160). Philo saw the Jewish idea of this principle of reason as the mediator between God and man, though he did not personalize the term as John very clearly does. The early church fathers saw logos as conveying the idea of Jesus’s divinity. Ignatius taught “that there is one God, the Almighty, who has manifested Himself by Jesus Christ His Son, who is His Word, not spoken, but essential” (Epistle to the Magnesians 8). The “Word” then was “a substance begotten by divine power.” This thought has continued to the present. The Word, Jesus, is the perfect revelation of the invisible God, the “utterance of God’s mind,” who declares God’s purpose and mediates God’s power—all functions of a word (White, 2.2160). In the first chapter of John’s Gospel, the apostle speaks of Jesus as the expression of God, the logos (John 1:1, 14), and most translations use the term Word to translate logos. In the book of Revelation, the apostle John uses the term to speak of the triumphant judge and leader of heaven’s armies as the “Word” of God whose robe drips blood, referring to Jesus’s sacrifice (Rev. 19:13).

Many religions and heterodox groups deny that Jesus was the Word (believing him to be simply a prophet, a guru, an enlightened one, or some other spiritual person) or assert that his being the Word does not mean being divine. In this way, they depart from John’s understanding of Jesus and orthodox teaching about Jesus.

See also TRINITY, THE

Bibliography. C. Brown, ed., The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology; G. Kittel, ed., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament; R. E. O. White, “Word of God,” in vol. 2 of The Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible.

H. W. House

LOST BOOKS OF THE BIBLE, MORMON VIEW OF. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church or Mormonism) claims that references in the Bible to works that are no longer extant “attest to the fact that our present Bible does not contain all of the word of the Lord.” These so-called lost books contain “those documents that are mentioned in the Bible in such a way that it is evident they are considered authentic and valuable, but that are not found in the Bible today” (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). These books include the Wars of the Lord (Num. 21:14), the Book of Jashar (2 Sam. 1:18), the book of Nathan the Prophet (1 Chron. 29:29), the Book of Jehu (2 Chron. 20:34), Paul’s lost Epistle to the Corinthians (previous to the letter we have today), and a letter to the Ephesians (also thought to be earlier than the one we have today). Also included are books mentioned but not found in the Book of Mormon, such as the writings of Zenock, Zenos, and Neum (Alma 33:3–17). Joseph Smith also argued that the supposed Book of Abraham and the Book of Moses were among the “lost books.”

The Book of Moses. In 1830 Joseph Smith claimed that an angel had instructed him to produce a new translation of the Bible and include “many important points touching the salvation of men, [that] had been taken from the Bible, or lost before it was compiled” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 10–11). The Book of Moses is composed of some of these “lost” writings, and Smith placed them in his new version of Genesis. Unlike the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham, the Book of Moses did not come from an alleged or actual physical source but was simply a “revelation” from an angel. Although Smith completed the first draft of his “revelation” in 1831, over the next thirteen years he continued to edit, revise, and correct the Book of Moses. The new material Smith introduced included modifications to the stories of the creation, Adam and Eve, and the fall. Smith’s writings also “wove Christian doctrine into the text” by expanding the text “far beyond the biblical version” (Bushman, 138). Since the Book of Moses was a “revelation” rather than a translation from “golden plates” or papyri, critics have not been able to judge the authenticity of the text.

The Book of Abraham. The Book of Abraham is allegedly “a Translation of some Ancient Records that have fallen into our hands, from the Catacombs of Egypt, purporting to be the writings of Abraham, while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand upon papyrus” (Smith, History of the Church, 524). Smith bought the papyri from an antiquities dealer in 1835. When Michael Chandler came to Kirtland, Ohio, with his exhibit of mummies and papyri, Smith was given permission to view the papyri, and he declared that they “contained the writings of Abraham . . . another the writings of Joseph of Egypt” (Smith, History of the Church, 236). Under Smith’s authority, the church bought the entire exhibit for $2,400. Smith “translated” the “Book of Abraham” but did not translate the writings of the biblical Joseph before his death. The papyri were later lost and were thought to have been destroyed in a fire in 1871. In 1880 the Book of Abraham, along with the rest of the Pearl of Great Price, was declared scripture. Smith copied several drawings contained in the papyri, along with explanations, and these were included in church publications.

In 1966 papyri were found in New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art. They had drawings of a temple and maps of the Kirtland area on the back. The papyri were passed down from Joseph’s first wife, Emma, who sold them to Abel Combs, who gave them to his housekeeper, Charlotte, who gave them to her daughter, who gave them to the museum in 1918.

Hieroglyphics have only been translatable since the Rosetta Stone was fully deciphered in 1824. At the time Smith came into possession of the papyri, no one outside a select group of scholars would have even had a possibility of translating them. Consequently, during Smith’s lifetime and again when the papyri were rediscovered, Smith’s translation of the hieroglyphics was vehemently disputed. Today, scholars know that the papyri are actually excerpts from the Egyptian Book of the Dead and the Book of Breathing. Smith’s explanations of the drawings have been shown to be wholly wrong as well. Abraham’s name is not mentioned, and the papyri have been dated to the late Ptolemaic or early Roman period, roughly fifteen hundred years after Abraham lived. This last point is important since Smith claimed the Book of Abraham was “written by his [Abraham’s] own hand upon papyrus” (History of the Church, 524). Mormon apologists claim that, while the papyri known today may have been used by Smith, the papyri he used to compose the Book of Abraham are not among them.

Enoch. Mormons also claim, somewhat confusingly, that writings within the Book of Moses, the “extracts” from the prophesies of Enoch, are from another “lost book.” They argue that their “Enoch” writings are the same as the pseudepigraphic books of Enoch, probably composed between 200 BC and AD 200. Gordon Hinckley has claimed, “There was once indeed an ancient book of Enoch, but it became lost and was not discovered until our own time, when it can be reliably reconstructed from some hundreds of manuscripts in a dozen different languages” (78). He argued that the church shunned Enoch and that even though “Enoch was treasured as a canonical book by the early Christians . . . they would have none of it” (78). In reality the books of Enoch were written in Aramaic, Greek, Ethiopic, and Slavonic; have been known since the early centuries of the church (they are cited in the book of Jude); and are known from three principal versions. The historical books of Enoch bear no resemblance to Smith’s “Enoch” in either style or content and “appear to be independent productions” (Bushman, 138).

Conclusion. In the case of the lost Book of Moses, there is no physical evidence to compare with Smith’s translation. However, modern textual criticism has shown that the materials used by Joseph Smith to “find” the lost Book of Abraham and the writings of Enoch bear no resemblance to Smith’s writings, and thus the scholarship casts doubt on Smith’s claim of supernatural ability to “translate” them.

Bibliography. R. L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling; Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “Lost Books,” in Bible Dictionary, http://scriptures.lds.org/en/bd/l/40; G. B. Hinckley, “A Strange Thing in the Land: The Return of the Book of Enoch, Part 1,” Ensign; Joseph Smith Jr., History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, vol. 2; Joseph Smith Jr., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, edited by Joseph Fielding Smith.

R. V. Huggins

LOTUS SUTRA. The Lotus Sutra is a Mahayana Buddhist text venerated throughout China and Japan, especially by Tendai and Nichiren Buddhist sects. It is regarded as containing the quintessential expression of truth.

The Lotus Sutra has twenty-eight chapters, in narrative, dialogue, and verse. The main character is the historic Buddha Sakyamuni, who is joined by another Buddha (Prabhutaratna) and a host of bodhisattvas, arhats, monks, gods, and others. The sutra describes a complex cosmology and emphasizes the power of the Buddha—for example, in his revealing myriads of worlds, each with its own Buddha. The text derides the Hinayana ideals of the arhat and claims that all people can become fully enlightened beings through the compassion of bodhisattvas. For example, in chapter 25, the bodhisattva of compassion, Avalokiteshvara, is especially glorified, and this chapter becomes an independent text. Out of profound compassion, this bodhisattva assumes thirty-three different forms and manifests himself anywhere in the world to save people from danger or suffering.

Nichiren Buddhism and Soka Gokkai International both elevate the Lotus Sutra as their core text and chant, as an act of worship, the mantra Namu-myoho-renge-kyo (Praise to the Lotus Sutra). The mere chanting of this mantra is believed to bring liberation.

Bibliography. C. S. Prebish and K. K. Tanaka, eds., The Faces of Buddhism in America; Soka Gakkai International, SGI-USA home page, http://www.sgi-usa.org/; Soka Gakkai International, “Lotus Sutra,” http://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/lsoc/toc/.

H. P. Kemp

LUCIFER, MORMON VIEW OF. In Mormon thought, Lucifer is a literal son of Elohim (God the Father) and brother to the Mormon Jesus and all humankind. According to Mormon scripture, Lucifer disapproved of a salvation plan that featured his brother Jesus as humanity’s savior, a plan that allowed human beings their “free agency” to choose. When Lucifer’s alternate plan to compel people to believe was rejected, he led a rebellion in heaven and was ultimately “thrust down” along with “a third part of the host of heaven,” thus becoming the “devil and his angels.” By them all human beings are tempted and enticed to live in opposition to righteousness (Moses 4:1–4; 6:49; D&C 29:36–38).

As part of their punishment neither Lucifer nor the fallen angels will be able to gain mortal bodies, which means they will have no opportunity to progress throughout eternity. Their future includes being cast into outer darkness along with the sons of perdition, those who had a perfect knowledge of the Mormon gospel but chose to speak against it.

Bibliography. Joseph Smith Jr. et al., Pearl of Great Price; Smith et al., Doctrine and Covenants.

W. McKeever