Are Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses Christian?

[JMM1957]

Guesstimates off the top of my head–
Internationally 50% are converts
In the USA 25% are converts.

Interesting, I wouldn’t have thought that high.

 

[Horton]

In my opinion neither Mormons or JW are Christian as a faith. To be a Christian we must do and be certain things. We must acknowledge that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are one, triune. We must believe God sent Jesus Christ, incarnate of the Virgin, to earth to bring salvation to us all. We must believe in the crucifixion and resurrection. We must believe Jesus Christ then joined God the Father in heaven.

Neither JW or LDS are Christian as a faith.

 

[JMM1957]

Guesstimates off the top of my head–
Internationally 50% are converts
In the USA 25% are converts.

This relates to my post #77. I understand the Mormons accept the Bible as truth, so is your concept of the Father, Jesus and the HS derived from the Bible itself, or do any of these other books that I mentioned shed light on your understanding of who the three are? I think I know the answer but just wanted to make sure.

 

[rcwitness]

In my opinion neither Mormons or JW are Christian as a faith. To be a Christian we must do and be certain things. We must acknowledge that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are one, triune. We must believe God sent Jesus Christ, incarnate of the Virgin, to earth to bring salvation to us all. We must believe in the crucifixion and resurrection. We must believe Jesus Christ then joined God the Father in heaven.

Neither JW or LDS are Christian as a faith.

… and they are close to accepting all those things. It’s a matter of assent in to the Catholic principle of the Trinity. After that, the whole Joseph Smith, Brigham young, Pearl of Great Price, God the Father having a wife, etc. stuff will go away.

 

[rcwitness]

Guesstimates off the top of my head–
Internationally 50% are converts
In the USA 25% are converts.

Yes, the numbers probably suggest you are right. There are 6.5 million in the US! That’s not just from cradle Mormons.

 

[lax16]

… and they are close to accepting all those things. It’s a matter of assent in to the Catholic principle of the Trinity. After that, the whole Joseph Smith, Brigham young, Pearl of Great Price, God the Father having a wife, etc. stuff will go away.

They are? Why do you say that?

 

[arthra]

I feel like in a scholarly standpoint, they definitely are placed in the umbrella of Christianity. Another newer religion, the Baha’i Faith is viewed as a completely separate religion because it seems to conform to unity of all of the world religions ( believes abrahamic prophets, such as Moses, Jesus, Muhammad are also prophets with Zoroaster, Krishna and Buddah from eastern religions). I think all world religions have sects which the “traditional” understanding of the religion views as heretical. For instance the Ahmidiyyah Muslim community is regarded as heretical to most mainstream Muslims. The Hare Krishna movement is viewed as heretical to most mainstream Hindus.

Since you mentioned Baha’i Faith it’s true we do see ourselves as an independent world religion and we recognize that the major world religions all have the same Divine Source. We also acknowledge that Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons are Christians. Mormons are very active in our local interfaith council as are Catholics.

 

[jane_doe]

I have become confused on how the word “sacraments” is being used in this thread. I went to catholic.com/encyclopedia/sacraments. The entire article is worthy of careful reading. Among other things I found there is:

As this is a Catholic forum, I was using the Catholic definition and speaking Catholic-ese.

Yes, there are differences in the views of sacraments and the use of the word between different faith. If you want, we could go into that more.

 

[jane_doe]

This relates to my post #77. I understand the Mormons accept the Bible as truth, so is your concept of the Father, Jesus and the HS derived from the Bible itself, or do any of these other books that I mentioned shed light on your understanding of who the three are? I think I know the answer but just wanted to make sure.

LDS answer–
ALL scripture contributes to understanding of the Father, Son, and HS.

Note: the creeds are not scripture.

 

[SpeakInSilence]

If Christians are simply followers of Jesus are Muslims Christians?

There are hindu that see Jesus as an avatar of God, are they Christ?

Can an atheist be a Christian if they follow the teachings of Jesus?

Mormons are not considered Christian for one reason only, only one, they deny the Trinity. That’s it. That’s the limtus test for being a Christian, the Trinity.

That is why there baptisms are not valid.

Mormons can be wonderful people, they have a genuine faith in the religion they are taught in, but when we define Christianity as something more abstract then simple belief in the Trinity and then you pretty much allow anyone who revere Jesus in some way to be a Christian.

 

[Tarquin]

I have become confused on how the word “sacraments” is being used in this thread. I went to catholic.com/encyclopedia/sacraments. The entire article is worthy of careful reading. Among other things I found there is:

As this is a Catholic forum, I was using the Catholic definition and speaking Catholic-ese.

Yes, there are differences in the views of sacraments and the use of the word between different faith. If you want, we could go into that more.

That is part of my confusion. I do not see agreement between saying on one hand, “there are *differences *in the views of sacraments” if that means significant qualitative differences; and on the other hand “the Catholic church is admired and considered ‘on track’ … they at least have some type of sacraments and consider them critical to a person’s walk with God” if that means those same Catholic sacraments are qualitatively significant. If the Catholic sacraments are qualitatively significant, I should think there would be no significant “differences in the views” (between Catholic sacraments and Mormon ordinances). If there are significant “differences in the views” I should think the sacraments and/or ‘ordinances’ themselves are not qualitatively significant.

Aside: LDS consider ALL other churches rituals (Christian and non) to be invalid (it’s a priesthood authority issue), so it’s not just Catholic. But the Catholic church is admired and considered “on track” in regard that they at least have some type of sacraments and consider them critical to a person’s walk with God.

 

[SpeakInSilence]

LDS answer–
ALL scripture contributes to understanding of the Father, Son, and HS.

Note: the creeds are not scripture.

Jane do you realize that Holy bible you use was put together and canon decided at one of those councils.

I always found it funny that Mormons believe that corruption seeped into the early Church yet uses a canon of scripture put together by that same corrupt Church, also using a translation of the Bible (the King James) that is considered a weaker translation of the ancient manuscripts.

 

[jane_doe]

That is part of my confusion. I do not see agreement between saying on one hand, “there are *differences *in the views of sacraments” if that means significant qualitative differences; and on the other hand “the Catholic church is admired and considered ‘on track’ … they at least have some type of sacraments and consider them critical to a person’s walk with God” if that means those same Catholic sacraments are qualitatively significant. If the Catholic sacraments are qualitatively significant, I should think there would be no significant “differences in the views” (between Catholic sacraments and Mormon ordinances). If there are significant “differences in the views” I should think the sacraments and/or ‘ordinances’ themselves are not qualitatively significant.

Does post 69 help alleviate your confusion?

 

[Tarquin]

LDS answer–
ALL scripture contributes to understanding of the Father, Son, and HS.

Note: the creeds are not scripture.

Aren’t the blatantly creedal Articles of Faith scripture?

1. **any system, doctrine, or formula **of religious belief, as of a denomination.
2. **any system or codification **of belief or of opinion.

The Articles of Faith outline 13 basic points of belief of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Prophet Joseph Smith first wrote them in a letter to John Wentworth, a newspaper editor, in response to Mr. Wentworth’s request to know what members of the Church believed. They were subsequently published in Church periodicals. They are now regarded as scripture and included in the Pearl of Great Price. - lds-dot-org

The canonization of the Wentworth Letter as part of the Pearl of Great Price in 1880 reflected and assured its undisputed priority. And when James E. Talmage was asked by the First Presidency in 1891 to prepare a work on theology for use as a textbook in Church schools, it was to these Articles of Faith that he turned for the outline of his volume. - eom.byu.edu/index.php/Articles_of_Faith

From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

Creed (Lat. credo, I believe), in general, a form of belief. The word, however, as applied to religious belief has received a variety of meanings, two of which are specially important. (I) It signifies the entire body of beliefs held by the adherents of a given religion; and in this sense it is equivalent to doctrine or to faith where the latter is used in its objective meaning. Such is its signification in expressions like “the conflict of creeds”, “charitable work irrespective of creed”, “the ethics of conformity to creed”, etc. (2) In a somewhat narrower sense, a creed is a summary of the principal articles of faith professed by a church or a community of believers. Thus by the “creeds of Christendom” are understood those formulations of the Christian faith which at various times have been drawn up and accepted by one or the other of the Christian churches. - catholic.com/encyclopedia/creed

 

[Tarquin]

Does post 69 help alleviate your confusion?

No, not as I have expressed it.

 

[jane_doe]

Aren’t the blatantly creedal Articles of Faith scripture?From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

The LDS Article of Faith are considered scripture and bound as such. The mainstream Christian creeds (Apostles’, Nicene, Chalcedonies, etc) are not consider scripture, even by mainstream churches, and are not bound as such.

No, not as I have expressed it.

I’m sorry then, I guess I’m not understanding your question well enough to address it.

 

[gazelam]

ewtn.com/library/theology/mormbap1.htm

Here is an unofficial LDS response to the Catholic rejection of LDS baptism: ojs.lib.byu.edu/spc/index.php/MSR/article/viewFile/32134/30381

It’s titled “Maximus Nothus Decretum: A Look at the Recent Catholic Declaration regarding Latter-day Saint Baptisms”

I particularly enjoyed the quote by my anti-Communist hero John Paul II who acknowledged that the formulation of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan creed was a response to the hellenization of the church and its perceived need for “ways of presenting her doctrine which would be adequate and convincing in that cultural context.” (John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope (New York: Knopf, 1994), 46.

For good measure I’ll throw in my usual copy-paste quotes on the Trinity…

The New Testament itself is far from any doctrine of the Trinity or of a triune God who is three co-equal Persons of One Nature. (William J. Hill, The Three-Personed God (Washington DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1982), 27.)

There is no formal doctrine of the Trinity in the New Testament writers, if this means an explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons. (Edmund J. Fortman, The Triune God: A Historical Study of the Doctrine of the Trinity (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1972), 44

There is in them [the Apostolic Fathers], of course, no trinitarian doctrine and no awareness of a trinitarian problem. (JND Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, revised edition, (New York: Harper, 1978), 95.)

 

[RebeccaJ]

Here is an unofficial LDS response to the Catholic rejection of LDS baptism: ojs.lib.byu.edu/spc/index.php/MSR/article/viewFile/32134/30381

It’s titled “Maximus Nothus Decretum: A Look at the Recent Catholic Declaration regarding Latter-day Saint Baptisms”

I particularly enjoyed the quote by my anti-Communist hero John Paul II who acknowledged that the formulation of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan creed was a response to the hellenization of the church and its perceived need for “ways of presenting her doctrine which would be adequate and convincing in that cultural context.” (John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope (New York: Knopf, 1994), 46.

For good measure I’ll throw in my usual copy-paste quotes on the Trinity…

The New Testament itself is far from any doctrine of the Trinity or of a triune God who is three co-equal Persons of One Nature. (William J. Hill, The Three-Personed God (Washington DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1982), 27.)

There is no formal doctrine of the Trinity in the New Testament writers, if this means an explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons. (Edmund J. Fortman, The Triune God: A Historical Study of the Doctrine of the Trinity (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1972), 44

There is in them [the Apostolic Fathers], of course, no trinitarian doctrine and no awareness of a trinitarian problem. (JND Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, revised edition, (New York: Harper, 1978), 95.)

Your post only proves the point that Mormons are not Christian.

 

[RebeccaJ]

The LDS Article of Faith are considered scripture and bound as such. The mainstream Christian creeds (Apostles’, Nicene, Chalcedonies, etc) are not consider scripture, even by mainstream churches, and are not bound as such.

I’m sorry then, I guess I’m not understanding your question well enough to address it.

The creeds are a profession of the Christian faith. Sometimes Protestant churches will use the phrase confession of faith rather than profession of faith. What we profess/confess is a a sign, and a symbol, that the beliefs one holds are that of the universal, apostolic faith. An unwillingness to profess a belief in the universal, apostolic, faith is a sign and a symbol that one does not hold to the Christian faith.

An prospective adult convert who cannot in good conscience profess the Christian faith, should not be baptized, Similarly, a convert to Mormonism must meet with a Bishop and profess their faith in the Mormon Church. Do you believe Joseph Smith was a prophet of God? …and other questions. One who in good conscience cannot profess the Mormon faith, should not be baptized. Right?

FYI, The word creed comes from Latin, credo, which means “I believe”, which are the first two words of one’s profession/confession of faith.

Credo in unum Deo.
I believe in one God.

 

[mackbrislawn]

But I absolutely view Mormonism as a logical conclusion to fractional Protestantism. That is, split after split after split has a logical conclusion in Mormonism, but Mormonism is not the only logical conclusion.

Yes, the trajectory of the Protestant Reformation can conclude in a couple of ways. One way to conclude is for the Reformation to go to seed, which is the way the Mormons and also the JW’s do it, in this this way. The heritage of the Reformation is to protest or reform whatever theological environment there is and in the case of Joseph Smith and Pastor Russell their environment was Protestantism, so they protested against Protestantism. That is, one of the tenets of the Reformation was that there was no such thing as an official, or divinely guided institution to interpret the bible. However, that is exactly what the founders of Mormonism and the Watchtower set up! Official, God-guided, scripture interpreters! Mormonism has prophets and apostles, and the JW’s are God’s spirit directed organization. A direct denial of Protestantism.

Now, the Catholic Church claims to be the official scripture interpreter and proclaimer of God’s message, which was denied by the Reformation. But such an institution is needed. So, the founders of Mormonism and the JW’s filled that need! Curling of the Reformation back upon itself is a logical conclusion.

The other trajectory of the Reformation is reductionism–more and more Christian beliefs are realized to be merely Catholic tradition, until finally, with the modern liberals, belief in scripture itself is realized to be simply a Catholic tradition, and the inspiration of scripture is cast aside. Reduction until nothing is left, the other logical conclusion.

The fruits of the Reformation.