Sunday afternoon, two young Mormon missionaries stopped by as I was putting up Christmas lights outside the house. In the past, I have played ignorant and allowed them to think I was a “religious seeker” of sorts, open to listening to their views. Today, as I saw them approach from my perch on the ladder, I prayed and felt directed to take a different tack.

“What is the gospel?” I immediately asked them.

They responded with an explanation that would suggest that we share the same views, but as I drilled down, it became apparent that we are worlds apart, and my refusal to budge from the dividing line sent them away more frustrated and angry than I’ve ever seen an LDS missionary before: They actually told me to my face that I am an apostate, as they turned their backs and quickly walked down my driveway.

What was the dividing line?

I embrace the “heresy of the closed canon.”

Final authority for the Mormon is not the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants or the Pearl of Great Price—all of which are sacred books to them. Their final authority is the living apostles and prophets of the LDS church, who possess the right to interpret and supercede all former teachings.

In the past, I’ve never had an LDS missionary openly tell me this, because we’ve spent most of our time dithering over obscure Bible passages about baptism for the dead or the meaning of the trinity. In the end, they leave smiling, as we “agree to disagree.” The problem with this verbal shadowboxing is that it avoids the key area of difference between the LDS and biblical Christianity—which is not individual interpretations of obscure Bible passages, but what holds the final authority as the Word of God.

Lest you think this encounter gave me the spiritual jollies, let me remind you that the sovereign grace of God is the only thing that separates me from these sincerely deceived young men.

I inwardly grieved and prayed for them for the rest of the day.

I recently read this article on the need for evangelical leaders to embrace the “new” because they may miss the next big thing (e.g. the Catalyst Conference, the Willow Creek phenomenon or Rob Bell’s NOOMA).

Interestingly, last night I read an article in National Geographic magazine about the Hadza, hunter-gatherers whose culture has experienced little to no noticeable change in 10,000 years. This people group of 1,000 living in northwestern Tanzania is nomadic, its members carrying their few possessions in small sacks on their backs. They resist change, are non-literate and have no understanding of or interest in the outside world. As the article aptly puts it, after 10 millennia, they have left no footprint on the earth.

So, here’s the question: Is our obsession with change, progress, information and novelty a Christian value or a Western value? How does an expression of Christianity that places these values in such high regard engage with a culture like the Hadza that places a high value on tradition? One could argue that the introduction of medical technology, electricity, written language and hygiene to the Hadza would greatly improve their plight. In fact, some would say that these improvements provide a perfect venue for conveying the gospel.

But what if they don’t want these things, and what if our insistence that they are backward because they don’t becomes a hindrance to them accepting the one Thing they do need?

Is it any different here in the land of iPhones, big screens and H1N1 vaccinations?