I was just pondering on how the atonement as taught in "Believing Christ" by Stephen Robinson and by Brad Wilcox in "The continuous atonement" compares to the sort of things Joseph Smith taught. Both Robinson and Wilcox knock the wind out of the gospel by replacing God's divine graces with protestant grace and the two notions of grace are not only completely different, they are enemies. One cannot live while the other remains.
I was just pondering on Joseph Smith's teachings that we should make our calling and election sure and how that compares to the gospel found in "Believing Christ". The two notions are antithesis to each other. Robinson teaches that through our baptismal covenant we become one with Christ and that our imperfection is overwhelmed by his perfection in matters of divine accounting and thereby we are are made worthy of the same blessings he could gain through his perfectness.
Joseph Smith teaches that we should give such diligent heed that we may make our calling and election sure.
Those are simply not compatible ideas. One gives us the blessings of perfection, effectively, at baptism. The other lays out a long road for us. If "Believing Christ" is right than the long road Joseph Smith lays out for us has no purpose. It isn't relevant to our exaltation. It is a gospel perk for those who may have an interest.