Are Mormons and Unitarians Christians?

[Stephen168]

This quote of yours directly contradicts John 17:22.

Cherry picking has never served you or Mormonism well. My “quote” is consistent with John’s Gospel, the New Testament as a whole, and the early church writings.

Do you have any New Testament quote about God once being a human being?

 

[TOmNossor]

gazelam:

This quote of yours directly contradicts John 17:22.

Cherry picking has never served you or Mormonism well. My “quote” is consistent with John’s Gospel, the New Testament as a whole, and the early church writings.

Stephen,

John 17:22 claims that multiple human beings should be ONE as God the Father and God the Son are ONE. There is no place in scripture that so clearly gives information as to HOW God the Father and God the Son are ONE as this “high priestly prayer.”

The ONE-BEING-NESS embraced post Augustine and believed by Catholics today is a oneness that cannot be possessed by human beings.

You may quote other oneness scriptures, you may claim that LDS are wrong for other reasons, you may put on Catholic blinders and only read scripture from the DEVELOPED theology of the 4th century, or you may do whatever you may do, but the thoughtful Christian who tries to understand ONLY what the BIBLE says cannot see this differently.

If one tries to ask scripture HOW God the Father and God the Son are one, the only answer they can get is that Father and Son are one in a way that multiple humans can also be one.

Your quote does directly contradict the most clear (indeed almost all) readings of John 17:22 (and John 17:11 for that matter).

It is for this reason that I believe the LDS view (as espoused by me, Blake Ostler, David Paulsen, and most LDS who write about systematic theology) is MORE BIBLICAL than the most common educated (folks like Augustine, Aquinas, and Ott) and most common uneducated (folks you find in the Catholic pew who pontificate in modalist and tritheistic ways frequently) Catholic views of the Trinity.

I don’t know of a response to this that severely mutes its power, but I do know your “cherry picking” comment didn’t provide one.

Charity, TOm

 

[Stephen168]

In Mormonism, the very word divinity has only a functional, not a substantial content, because the divinity originates when the three gods decided to unite and form the divinity to bring about human salvation. This divinity and man share the same nature and they are substantially equal. God the Father is an exalted man, native of another planet, who has acquired his divine status through a death similar to that of human beings, the necessary way to divinization. God the Father has relatives and this is explained by the doctrine of infinite regression of the gods who initially were mortal. God the Father has a wife, the Heavenly Mother, with whom he shares the responsibility of creation. They procreate sons in the spiritual world. Their firstborn is Jesus Christ, equal to all men, who has acquired his divinity in a pre-mortal existence. Even the Holy Spirit is the son of heavenly parents. The Son and the Holy Spirit were procreated after the beginning of the creation of the world known to us. Four gods are directly responsible for the universe, three of whom have established a covenant and thus form the divinity.

As is easily seen, to the similarity of titles there does not correspond in any way a doctrinal content which can lead to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. The words Father, Son and Holy Spirit, have for the Mormons a meaning totally different from the Christian meaning. The differences are so great that one cannot even consider that this doctrine is a heresy which emerged out of a false understanding of the Christian doctrine. The teaching of the Mormons has a completely different matrix.

 

[otjm]

Mormons believe that God the Father is an exalted human being, We will let the rest of their “trinitarian theology” go, as that in itself is sufficient. They use the same words, but their words have a far different theological meaning than the Church.

 

[otjm]

No, for a simple answer. And you cannot make a blanket statement as to all Protestants; when there are something like 35,000 denominations, there are bound to be variances.

Protestants do not have to believe the sum total of sacramental theology to have valid baptisms. They need to accept the Trinity - 3 persons in one God, and intend to do what the Bible requires - baptize in the name…etc. They do not need further, and that is the decision of the Church.

 

[otjm]

The Church thinks differently. Conditional baptism is to be used only where it cannot be determined that the individual was actually baptized.

The Church has paid attention to the Protestant churches far better than most people realize. The Church has a list of those religious assemblies who do not have valid baptisms. And granted that baptisms among some people may be more ritualistic and pro forma than anything; but the Church has the authority to bind and loose, and has authority over the sacraments, and the decision of the Church is that Protestant baptisms are valid (with the exception of those denominations, few in number which clearly do not comply) unless shown to the contrary. The Church takes their baptisms very, very seriously.

 

[otjm]

QED.

Thank you.

 

[otjm]

I might disagree with you as to when the theology developed. Development and defining that development officially are two different matters.

 

[thephilosopher6]

From the perspective of the Catholic Church, probably they are not Christian.

The Church does not accept their baptism because they’re polytheistic. The Church does not consider Mormons to be Christian in any sense of the word.

From the perspective of some Protestant denominations, perhaps they are regarded as Christian.

No, nearly all Protestant denominations reject them as being Christian due to their polytheistic nature. The only exception to this might be some provinces in the Anglican Communion. Other than that, even the very liberal Evangelical Lutheran Church in America rejects their baptism and does not regard them as Christians. Very few Protestants would consider them Christians. Evangelical Christianity has a particularly rocky relationship with Mormonism.

From their own perspective, they are Christian, maybe even the only true Christians.

They do indeed consider themselves Christians, despite their denial of central Christian doctrines as well as their acceptance of doctrines which stand in stark contrast to Christianity.

From the Jewish perspective, they are definitely Christian so long as they are followers of Christ, regardless of baptism

It’s not as simple as how Orthodox Jews might disregard Reform Judaism as a valid expression of Judaism, or how Sunni Muslims reject Ahmadiyya Muslims as true Muslims. No. Mormons reject the most basic Christian doctrines. For example:

• Mormons worship three gods, Elohim, Jehovah, and the Holy Ghost.
• Mormons believe that Elohim is an exalted extraterrestrial and his literal son, which he and his godess wife begot, is Jehovah.
• Mormons believe an infinite amount of gods exist in the universe.
• Mormons believe that the universe is eternal, not having been created by God.
• The gods of Mormonism are mere creatures like us, but just in an exalted state.
• We too can become gods of our own worlds if we work hard enough according to Mormonism.
• Although because U.S. law now forbids it, Mormons consider polygamy a valid form of marriage and believe marriage is the ultimate way to salvation.
• Mormons employ numerous Masonic rituals in their “Temples” which are utterly foreign to anything in Christianity.
• Mormons consider the Book of Mormon to be scripture more perfect than the Bible.

Mormons cannot at all be considered Christians. They are farther from Christianity than any other faith. They are an actual cult.

 

[exnihilo]

The Church thinks differently. Conditional baptism is to be used only where it cannot be determined that the individual was actually baptized.

The Church has paid attention to the Protestant churches far better than most people realize.

A problem is, as is pointed out often on this forum, there isn’t really Protestantism. Even when there are denominations they can often internally vary widely in theology and practice. The Church as a whole may pay close attention but the individual decisions are possibly being made by someone who doesn’t have that in depth knowledge.

 

[TOmNossor]

I might disagree with you as to when the theology developed. …

I didn’t mean to imply that Augustine INVENTED the current almost universal Catholic view during his lifetime. My point was that after Augustine with the exception of some of the more radical speculative theologians like Karl Rahner and Elizabeth Johnson, the one-being-ness has been a solid part of Catholic thought. Now, I don’t know when you think it developed, but most of the theologians at Nicea embraced homoousian (Greek for consubstantial) in what scholars call the generic sense. Eusebius of Caesarea wrote that God the Father and God the Son were homoousian just as a human father and a human son were homoousian. Over the next handful of decades semi-Arian positions were embraced by almost all valid bishops across the entire world. The embracing of homoousian in the numeric sense that is evident in Augustine’s writings and likely was the position of Athanasius didn’t became a near universal position until the second half of the 4th century at the earliest.
This tangent aside: Stephen responded to the use of John 17:22 by claiming it was “cherry picked” and then claiming that Catholicism’s view with respect to the ONE-BEING-NESS of God the Father and God the Son is consistent with the Bible as a whole. I think he is WRONG.
The view that Catholics after Augustine espouse is not consistent with John 17:22 or John 17:11 AND there is no place in the Bible that more clearly guides when the question is HOW are God the Father and God the Son ONE? The rest of the Bible has places were Christ is exalted unrestrainedly, places where Christ is exalted restrained by the person of the Father, places where Christ and the Father are one, places were Christ and the Father are distinct, places where Christ is spoken of as divine, places were there is ONE God (who is the Father), and …. These passages lead to different understandings of Christ’s divinity or lack of divinity and Christ’s unity with the Father or distinction from the Father. But nowhere does the Bible offer better information on HOW God the Father and God the Son are ONE (and how they are distinct for that matter) than is offered in the “high priestly prayer.” John and if accurately captured the Person offering the “high priestly prayer” CANNOT be thinking about God the Father and God the Son being ONE in the same way that Augustine and modern Catholics believe.
Furthermore, every other passage in the Bible concerning oneness/distinctness, equal/subordinate, divine/human, … COULD be aligned with the oneness experienced by perfected human oneness (which I would say is approached by perfect husband/wife, perfect co-disciples of Christ united in the ministry, and other such perfect earthly human unions). But, the ONENESS of John 17 could not be a ONENESS as Augustine taught.
So, if one reads the ENTIRE Bible and searches for HOW God the Father and God the Son are one, the non-cherrypicked answer is still that God the Father and God the Son are one in a way that John and Jesus Christ believe humans can be one.
Charity, TOm

 

[Horton]

With all charity TOm, John 17:22 says nothing of the sort. To accurately understand what is really being said in the bible, one MUST take all things in context. John 17 MUST be read in totality to understand what Jesus Christ is saying. Read the whole chapter and then come back to explain exactly how this means:

You may quote other oneness scriptures, you may claim that LDS are wrong for other reasons, you may put on Catholic blinders and only read scripture from the DEVELOPED theology of the 4th century, or you may do whatever you may do, but the thoughtful Christian who tries to understand ONLY what the BIBLE says cannot see this differently.
If one tries to ask scripture HOW God the Father and God the Son are one, the only answer they can get is that Father and Son are one in a way that multiple humans can also be one.

Using your own words, not the words of anyone else. Time to think for yourself here TOm.

For Lent I read the New Testament from Acts to Jude. There are so many text that completely contradict LDS thought/teaching.

The Prayer of Jesus.
1 When Jesus had said this, he raised his eyes to heaven and said, “Father, the hour has come. Give glory to your son, so that your son may glorify you, 2 just as you gave him authority over all people, so that he may give eternal life to all you gave him.
3 Now this is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. 4 I glorified you on earth by accomplishing the work that you gave me to do. 5 Now glorify me, Father, with you, with the glory that I had with you before the world began. 6 I revealed your name to those whom you gave me out of the world. They belonged to you, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word. 7 Now they know that everything you gave me is from you, 8 because the words you gave to me I have given to them, and they accepted them and truly understood that I came from you, and they have believed that you sent me.
Cont…

 

[Horton]

cont from above

9 I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for the ones you have given me, because they are yours, 10 and everything of mine is yours and everything of yours is mine, and I have been glorified in them. 11 And now I will no longer be in the world, but they are in the world, while I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep them in your name that you have given me, so that they may be one just as we are. 12 When I was with them I protected them in your name that you gave me, and I guarded them, and none of them was lost except the son of destruction, in order that the scripture might be fulfilled. 13 But now I am coming to you. I speak this in the world so that they may share my joy completely. 14 I gave them your word, and the world hated them, because they do not belong to the world any more than I belong to the world. 15 I do not ask that you take them out of the world but that you keep them from the evil one.
16 They do not belong to the world any more than I belong to the world. 17 Consecrate them in the truth. Your word is truth. 18 As you sent me into the world, so I sent them into the world. 19 And I consecrate myself for them, so that they also may be consecrated in truth. 20 I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, 21 so that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me.
> 22 And I have given them the glory you gave me, so that they may be one, as we are one, 23 I in them and you in me, that they may be brought to perfection as one, that the world may know that you sent me, and that you loved them even as you loved me. 24 Father, they are your gift to me. I wish that where I am they also may be with me, that they may see my glory that you gave me, because you loved me before the foundation of the world. 25 Righteous Father, the world also does not know you, but I know you, and they know that you sent me.
26 I made known to them your name and I will make it known, that the love with which you loved me may be in them and I in them.”

 

[Stephen168]

Prove the Mormon claims. Give some quotes from the ECF to show they believed God was once a man.

Stephen168,

I cannot give quotes from the ECF to show they believed God {the FATHER} was once a man. I know of no such quotes.

And there are no Bible quotes.

The Mormon belief in the nature of God as never been Christian.

 

[Stephen168]

There are so many text that completely contradict LDS thought/teaching.

And no text that prove their teaching about the nature of God.

This is a common false dichotomy that Tom falls into ALOT; trying to prove Mormonism is right by trying to prove Catholicism is wrong.

 

[TOmNossor]

With all charity TOm, John 17:22 says nothing of the sort. To accurately understand what is really being said in the bible, one MUST take all things in context. John 17 MUST be read in totality to understand what Jesus Christ is saying. Read the whole chapter and then come back to explain exactly how this means:

TOmNossor:

You may quote other oneness scriptures, you may claim that LDS are wrong for other reasons, you may put on Catholic blinders and only read scripture from the DEVELOPED theology of the 4th century, or you may do whatever you may do, but the thoughtful Christian who tries to understand ONLY what the BIBLE says cannot see this differently.
If one tries to ask scripture HOW God the Father and God the Son are one, the only answer they can get is that Father and Son are one in a way that multiple humans can also be one.

Using your own words, not the words of anyone else. Time to think for yourself.

Horton,

I read the entire chapter. In it Christ prays that his disciples will become ONE as He and His Father are one.
Do you believe that Peter, James, and John are one being in three persons?

The “high priestly prayer” does not support Catholic belief concerning the Trinity. I am sure I have made this observation in the past. I am reading for myself. I want you to read for yourself.
I am not sure what I am not “taking into context.” I have read the Bible and I commented on many of the potential “context” ideas that could be thrown at this question. Unless you have a passage in the Bible that gives us reason to know HOW God the Father and God the Son are one better than John 17 does, I fail to see what context I missed?
I am quite sure Stephen is trying to distract from the force of this simple demonstration. Do not let him fool you. I have regularly told him that I and numerous LDS reject his simplistic characterization of my theology. But he keeps repeating it. This is a distraction and has nothing to do with HOW God the Father and God the Son are ONE. And his quotes lifted out of a discussion from long ago are IMO against the rules of this forum as they misrepresent what I was saying in the entirety of the discussion. He should know this.
I was and remain convinced the the Tri-unity embraced by LDS, documented by LDS leaders and scholars such as Blake Ostler, is MORE Biblical than the Catholic Tri-unity or Augustinian Trinity.
The more Stephen distracts from the force of this, the more convinced I become. I am not just showing that Catholics are wrong (not aligned with Bible), I am showing that Catholics are wrong in precisely the place LDS are correct (aligned with Bible). LDS believe that the unity of God the Father and God the Son is a unity that humans are called to enter into. Not a unity defined by a consubstantial divinity with God (the unity Catholics claim for Father and Son). But as ones who are fully united to one another and to God just as God the Father and God the Son are united. This LDS view is what Jesus prayed would be reality for His disciples not that they would become one-being with God.
Cont.

 

[TOmNossor]

Horton,
How can the Augustinian Trinity as embraced by Catholics be defined by a oneness that Jesus asked his disciples to also enjoy? And/or how am I misreading this?
Charity, TOm

 

[Stephen168]

The second point is that Mormon baptism was not instituted by Jesus Christ during his ministry; therefore it is not a Christian baptism. This would only apply to people raised as Mormons. Some Mormons may have received Christian baptisms before they rejected Christianity, so they might be Christian.

 

[Stephen168]

This quote of yours directly contradicts John 17:22.

And I have given them the glory you gave me, so that they may be one, as we are one

Jesus here prays for the disciples to attain the oneness that He has with The Father. A oneness of being is not something the disciples can ever achieve with each other. Jesus clearly is not praying for something unachievable by His disciples. The disciples can only achieve a oneness of unity and purpose. The early Church believed John 17:22.

Cherry picking has never served you or Mormonism well. My “quote” is consistent with John’s Gospel, the New Testament as a whole, and the early church writings.

Do you have any New Testament quote about God once being a human being?

I was hoping you had an answer. This is key to the Mormon nature of God. The Mormon exegesis of John 17:22 is that there are many gods which is consistent with the Mormon belief that man and God have the same nature, which is why they believe their god was once a man. Yet I don’t see these beliefs contained in the Bible. And we know the Mormon understanding of the nature of God has never been Christian.

 

[Horton]

Horton,

How can the Augustinian Trinity as embraced by Catholics be defined by a oneness that Jesus asked his disciples to also enjoy? And/or how am I misreading this?

Charity, TOm

Jesus is not talking about one-ness with God, as in becoming God. This prayer is about the Church, the Church founded by Christ and given to Peter and the other apostles, and then the world. Jesus is talking about all being one with His Church.

3 Now this is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. 4 I glorified you on earth by accomplishing the work that you gave me to do. 5 Now glorify me, Father, with you, with the glory that I had with you before the world began. 6 I revealed your name to those whom you gave me out of the world. They belonged to you, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word.

Note the passages in bold. How does that support the LDS thought? The reality is it doesn’t. “The only God” would indicate one, there can’t be many only gods as the LDS believe.

Verse 5. God the son is acknowledging he was with God the father before the world began. Again direct contradiction with LDS thought.

16 They do not belong to the world any more than I belong to the world. 17 Consecrate them in the truth. Your word is truth. 18 As you sent me into the world, so I sent them into the world. 19 And I consecrate myself for them, so that they also may be consecrated in truth

Again direct contradiction of LDS thought.

24 Father, they are your gift to me. I wish that where I am they also may be with me, that they may see my glory that you gave me, because you loved me before the foundation of the world.

How does this work in LDS thought?

You keep asking for us to provide proof Catholicism is true. You are making the claim it is not and the LDS thought is. It is up to you to prove it. We know Catholicism is the true Christian faith. We also know the LDS thought is a false.