Are Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses Christian?

[rcwitness]

Detailed…I’m puzzled as to what you mean by that. Everybody knows only ecumenical councils (as opposed to local) and the pope ex cathedra are infallible. No details there.

The details in defining Ex Cathedra are when you say the Holy Spirit does NOT guide these pronouncments. That was the reason I specifically questioned your post.

 

[MikeFr]

A few things about the Jehovah’s Witness view of Sacraments:

Regarding the Eucharist, Jehovah’s Witnesses (JWs) celebrate it once per year only. JWs believe there are 2 classes of Christians - the “anointed class” (once limited to 144,000 people though they may have changed that) and the “other sheep” (the rest of the JWs). The Communion “emblems” (not elements) are passed around the congregation but they may only be consumed by the anointed. Since there are very few anointed it is not uncommon for the emblems to be passed around the entire congregation with no one actually partaking.

Regarding baptism: This is a very important step in the JW religion. My understanding is that they don’t baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. They ask these questions prior to baptism:

(1) On the basis of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, have you repented of your sins and dedicated yourself to Jehovah to do his will?

(2) Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in association with God’s spirit-directed organization?

So JWs are baptized into the Watchtower organization. The Watchtower organization is of paramount importance to a JW. Loyalty to the organization is key.

JWs do not accept the Trinity. They do not believe in eternal punishment in hell. They do not worship Jesus. Their translation of the Bible substitutes the word “obeisance” for “worship” in the New Testament when referring to Jesus. Obeisance means “respect” or “Honor” - but not worship. JWs belive that Jesus was created by Jehovah and is the Archangel Michael, not begotten by his father before all worlds.

It is for these reasons, among many others, that I consider the Watchtower Bible and tract Society a nonchristian religion.

BTW the witnesses view those outside of their religion to be “bad association”. They are not allowed to join any other group that might have anything to do with any religion, including groups like the YMCA.

They are also legalistic: their members may not smoke, grow beards or celebrate birthdays. Any celebration of Christmas is also not allowed. They would not participate in a discussion board like this - they view Roman Catholicism in a very negative way. I’m pretty sure there have been no JWs involved with this or any other discussion on this website.

 

[ajcstr]

They would not participate in a discussion board like this - they view Roman Catholicism in a very negative way. I’m pretty sure there have been no JWs involved with this or any other discussion on this website.

You would be surprised, there are several. Apparently they sometimes change their login names sometimes but they normally drop off threads when they see they are not making progress.

 

[JMM1957]

A few things about the Jehovah’s Witness view of Sacraments:

**Regarding the Eucharist, Jehovah’s Witnesses (JWs) celebrate it once per year only. JWs believe there are 2 classes of Christians - the “anointed class” (once limited to 144,000 people though they may have changed that) and the “other sheep” (the rest of the JWs). The Communion “emblems” (not elements) are passed around the congregation but they may only be consumed by the anointed. Since there are very few anointed it is not uncommon for the emblems to be passed around the entire congregation with no one actually partaking. **

Regarding baptism: This is a very important step in the JW religion. My understanding is that they don’t baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. They ask these questions prior to baptism:

(1) On the basis of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, have you repented of your sins and dedicated yourself to Jehovah to do his will?

(2) Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in association with God’s spirit-directed organization?

So JWs are baptized into the Watchtower organization. The Watchtower organization is of paramount importance to a JW. Loyalty to the organization is key.

JWs do not accept the Trinity. They do not believe in eternal punishment in hell. They do not worship Jesus. Their translation of the Bible substitutes the word “obeisance” for “worship” in the New Testament when referring to Jesus. Obeisance means “respect” or “Honor” - but not worship. JWs belive that Jesus was created by Jehovah and is the Archangel Michael, not begotten by his father before all worlds.

It is for these reasons, among many others, that I consider the Watchtower Bible and tract Society a nonchristian religion.

BTW the witnesses view those outside of their religion to be “bad association”. They are not allowed to join any other group that might have anything to do with any religion, including groups like the YMCA.

They are also legalistic: their members may not smoke, grow beards or celebrate birthdays. Any celebration of Christmas is also not allowed. They would not participate in a discussion board like this - they view Roman Catholicism in a very negative way. I’m pretty sure there have been no JWs involved with this or any other discussion on this website.

I once worked with a JW who was in his 50’s and a JW his whole life and was considered to be an elder I think. He told me that he “thinks” that he had only seen one person in his entire life partake of the emblems in the congregations he was involved with.

 

[Hatikvah]

You would be surprised, there are several. Apparently they sometimes change their login names sometimes but they normally drop off threads when they see they are not making progress.

Yes, there was one who made a thread back from 2014 about the Jehovah’s Witnesses in the Holocaust. They were in concentration camps, too, and had to wear purple triangles.

 

[CarolNoel]

Interesting discussion. Thanks all.

 

[jane_doe]

These were the two I was mostly asking about:

An active interest in proselytizing nonbelievers; Unless referring to say third world countries, I don’t think that Catholics proselytize the general population around them like evangelicals, JW or Mormons.

Unless Catholics disavow the Great Commission, then I am skeptical of your answer here. No, Catholics don’t have to go about this like other faiths groups, but they do seem to have a very active interest in people coming in communion with Rome.

Strong emphasis upon education, both in the secular and religious arenas; Don’t know that this would apply to Catholics either. I think Catholics are generally very uneducated in religious arenas.

The presence of Catholic schools, colleges, religious formation classes, etc would suggest that Catholics are very interested in education. Now, are they always successful in getting people to attend and becoming educated? That’s a different question.

 

[jane_doe]

You would be surprised, there are several. Apparently they sometimes change their login names sometimes but they normally drop off threads when they see they are not making progress.

I can understand that. A non-JW forum is not always the most friendly to JW, and it is understandable to not want to stay.

 

[ajcstr]

I can understand that. A non-JW forum is not always the most friendly to JW, and it is understandable to not want to stay.

I think it’s that most of the Catholics in here know their faith well enough that the JW can’t get too far with their arguments.

But yes, this environment can become pretty hostile.

 

[ajcstr]

These were the two I was mostly asking about:

Unless Catholics disavow the Great Commission, then I am skeptical of your answer here. No, Catholics don’t have to go about this like other faiths groups, but they do seem to have a very active interest in people coming in communion with Rome.

The point I was making here is lay Catholics are much less likely to engage in this.

The presence of Catholic schools, colleges, religious formation classes, etc would suggest that Catholics are very interested in education. Now, are they always successful in getting people to attend and becoming educated? That’s a different question.

From that point of view yes, but compare the state of Catholic schools now to say the 60’s

Also, I attended a Catholic elementary school, high school and college and I can assure you after elementary school (with the Baltimore catechism - yuck - the multiplication tables of religion), religious education was NOT what I would call conservative orthodox Catholic teaching.

 

[Horton]

These were the two I was mostly asking about:

Unless Catholics disavow the Great Commission, then I am skeptical of your answer here. No, Catholics don’t have to go about this like other faiths groups, but they do seem to have a very active interest in people coming in communion with Rome.

The presence of Catholic schools, colleges, religious formation classes, etc would suggest that Catholics are very interested in education. Now, are they always successful in getting people to attend and becoming educated? That’s a different question.

The point is we are called to evangelize but not proselytize. There is a big difference. As Catholics we evangelize by the way we live our lives, the way we deal with others, the outreach we may do in the community. We are to show we are Christians rather than just tell them. When Catholics go out to do mission work the goal isn’t to make converts but to serve the needy. And no one is seen as less than for not doing mission work. Very different than the LDS mission culture.

Catholics are very interested in education. We are called to learn more about our faith, our culture, and issues in our world and communities to the best of our abilities and according to our interest. The difference is we are not told what we can or can’t read, can or can’t learn, can or can’t have an opinion about.

 

[mackbrislawn]

I understand… it just seems inefficient and reliant on the “wisdom” of men. (I mean no offense by this).

Of course- God can reveal whatever He wants. This could be a change in practice, or an elaboration on our understanding of eternal Truth.

Well,… yes…it is kind of inefficient. That is, to settle a debate that is raging on a particular issue, a world wide council of bishops must be called, they all have to come to the location at great expense, and argue and hash it out together. In the past, I understand that they even had brawls and fist fights. But, in the end, the Holy Spirit made sure the councils came to the correct decision about the debate. So, as I understand “negative guarantee,” the Holy Spirit doesn’t simply tell, or reveal to the council what’s what, but keeps them from making the wrong decision! In whatever way you can imagine that may work. The term “guide” I guess you could use, in a loose sense, but it has too much of a positive connotation.

Yes, this is an inefficient process! But, it keeps important decisions from being made too hastily. Even so, perhaps that is why the 1st Vatican Council confirmed the old tradition that the pope can speak infallibly as well. If a decision on a matter is needed quickly, the pope can speak ex cathedra, without the cumbersome and expensive process of a council.

Human wisdom? Right again. Using their wisdom, humans ponder on the mystery of God. Some to wrong conclusions such as Arius, and some to right conclusions, such as Anathasius. At the Council of Nicea, the Holy Spirit made sure the Arians did not prevail. (Note that the divinity of Christ was not a new idea, but an old one. The council did not come up with a novel teaching, but confirmed the old, and rejected the new teaching of Arius. Infallibly.)

 

[mackbrislawn]

The details in defining Ex Cathedra are when you say the Holy Spirit does NOT guide these pronouncments. That was the reason I specifically questioned your post.

The Holy Spirit is certainly involved in the infallibility of ecumenical councils and the pope, but should we say He “guides” them? I guess we can in a colloquial sense. He definitely is there in preventing false statements!

 

[jane_doe]

Well,… yes…it is kind of inefficient. That is, to settle a debate that is raging on a particular issue, a world wide council of bishops must be called, they all have to come to the location at great expense, and argue and hash it out together. In the past, I understand that they even had brawls and fist fights. But, in the end, the Holy Spirit made sure the councils came to the correct decision about the debate. So, as I understand “negative guarantee,” the Holy Spirit doesn’t simply tell, or reveal to the council what’s what, but keeps them from making the wrong decision! In whatever way you can imagine that may work. The term “guide” I guess you could use, in a loose sense, but it has too much of a positive connotation.

Yes, this is an inefficient process! But, it keeps important decisions from being made too hastily. Even so, perhaps that is why the 1st Vatican Council confirmed the old tradition that the pope can speak infallibly as well. If a decision on a matter is needed quickly, the pope can speak ex cathedra, without the cumbersome and expensive process of a council.

Human wisdom? Right again. Using their wisdom, humans ponder on the mystery of God. Some to wrong conclusions such as Arius, and some to right conclusions, such as Anathasius. At the Council of Nicea, the Holy Spirit made sure the Arians did not prevail. (Note that the divinity of Christ was not a new idea, but an old one. The council did not come up with a novel teaching, but confirmed the old, and rejected the new teaching of Arius. Infallibly.)

Thank you for your very informative response.

 

[ajcstr]

The point is we are called to evangelize but not proselytize. There is a big difference. As Catholics we evangelize by the way we live our lives, the way we deal with others, the outreach we may do in the community. We are to show we are Christians rather than just tell them. When Catholics go out to do mission work the goal isn’t to make converts but to serve the needy. And no one is seen as less than for not doing mission work.

Well put - I was trying to say that, thanks

JW’s go as far to complete paperwork regarding their door to door efforts.

Now that said, I admire the zeal of JW but they are structured to behave that way.

And I also admire the Mormon youth. Again, the Mormon culture seems structured to support the family which is a great thing and something Catholics can learn from in my opinion.

 

[ajcstr]

At the Council of Nicea, the Holy Spirit made sure the Arians did not prevail. (Note that the divinity of Christ was not a new idea, but an old one. The council did not come up with a novel teaching, but confirmed the old, and rejected the new teaching of Arius. Infallibly.)

Just as a side note, from the reading I have done on this, it appears to me that Constantine sided with the Arians in his own belief. He was baptized by an Arian bishop. So the notion that Constantine swayed the council really doesn’t make sense since Arianism was rejected.

 

[ajcstr]

One more note on infallibility… there have admittedly been evil men who have held the office of pope, yet none of them ever had a negative impact on doctrine.

 

[ajcstr]

But getting back to the origin of this thread, I have often wondered, do JW and Mormons have people in their history who walked away from wealth to follow the Lord or stand out from a christian charity point of view like for instance St Frances of Assisi, St Vincent DePaul, Mother Theresa … etc ?

 

[adf417]

But getting back to the origin of this thread, I have often wondered, do JW and Mormons have people in their history who walked away from wealth to follow the Lord or stand out from a christian charity point of view like for instance St Frances of Assisi, St Vincent DePaul, Mother Theresa … etc ?

I would like it if the JW’s would simply name any JW prior to 16th century. I have asked many times and - nothing.

Peace!!!

 

[Horton]

Well put - I was trying to say that, thanks

JW’s go as far to complete paperwork regarding their door to door efforts.

Now that said, I admire the zeal of JW but they are structured to behave that way.

And I also admire the Mormon youth. Again, the Mormon culture seems structured to support the family which is a great thing and something Catholics can learn from in my opinion.

Bolding mine*

I see the Catholic Church as very supportive of family, at least the parishes I’ve been to. From Catholic schools to the many youth activities available for kids. The family is encouraged to go to Mass together, spend time together, support each other, love one another.

I’m not sure if you know much about LDS culture or theology but there is a darkness behind the bright & shiny front. It appears the LDS culture is all about the family but what you don’t see is the man or woman, for whatever reason, doesn’t marry. Or the couple that doesn’t have kids. Or the man or woman who is in a SSA relationship. Or the many others who don’t conform to the LDS ideal. Did you know that in reality it is unacceptable for a person to not marry? That the belief is if a woman is not married in earthly life she will be assigned to a man as a plural wife in heaven. I have no idea what happens to a man if he isn’t married at the time of death.

Did you know the only way for a woman to get to their form of heaven is through a man such as their husband? I have yet been able to get a clear answer of how a boy sealed to his father can break that seal and spend eternity with his own wife and family…but wait…if the now grown boy is a father and his children are grown & married and sealed to their own families…is that sealing bond broken so those new families are sealed to each other? Can you see where is can get very confusing?

So yes the LDS appear to have great family values and I’m sure many of the LDS love and value their families. I’m speaking of individual LDS people but the culture and theology of the faith tradition as a whole.