S
StephenL
Guest
Are Mormons Christians? If not then why do they believe in Christ?
They’re not Christian because they don’t believe in the Trinity, and they believe in Christ because Mormon teaching includes some comments about Christ, which is because Joseph Smith (Mormonism’s founder) grew up in a Christian context and wanted his religion to appeal to Christians on the surface level, so he included some Christian language and characters in his teachings.Are Mormons Christians? If not then why do they believe in Christ?
No and neither are Seventh Day Adventists. Though I have met many good people in both. Though the Seventh Day Adventists seem to have a particular dislike for Catholics.Are Mormons Christians? If not then why do they believe in Christ?
This one I don’t get. They believe in the Trinity, ipso facto they are Christian. Am I missing something? Even Catholic Answers puts them in the Christian category: catholic.com/quickquestions/is-seventh-day-adventism-a-cultNo and neither are Seventh Day Adventists.
Seventh-day Adventism is not a cult. It does promote some strange ideas, including some with a decidedly anti-Catholic foundation, but it is a genuinely Christian denomination. Its members are both validly baptized Christians and theologically Christian in their beliefs (unlike, for example, Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses, who are neither).
Your 100% wrong they don’t believe in the same jesusThey have a small semblance of Trinitarian belief, but faith in Christ like we do. They’re Christian.
The LDS do not believe in the Trinity, therefore they do not believe in the same Christ in which Christianity believes. They believe in three divine beings who are one in purpose, not three Persons in one divine Being. They are, simply, polytheistic, and are not considered Christians by the Catholic Church, but an entirely different religion altogether.Are Mormons Christians? If not then why do they believe in Christ?
That is like saying “I am a monotheistic Hindu”.We Mormons are full-blown non-Trinitarian Christians.
Gazelam, do you understand the difference between “formal” and “material” doctrine? Of course the formal doctrine is not to be found in the Bible, but it is found “materially” in the raw data of Scripture. The “formal doctrine” is the Church’s “formal” teaching on the dogma of the Trinity. So your statement kind of misses the mark, if you know what I mean.Let’s just disabuse the notion that to be Christian one must believe in the doctrine of the Trinity.
Harper’s Bible Dictionary states: “The formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the New Testament.”
You are probably very correct. I don’t think any of them were Trinitarian, since they had just come out of their graves and probably had not yet been taught by the Apostles, don’t you think? This was before Pentecost and therefore before the Church had even begun. What does that prove?Matthew 27 (KJV)
*51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.*
Clearly, not a single Trinitarian was to be found among these resurrected early Christian Saints.
Oxymoron. There is no such thing as a non-Trinitarian Christian.We Mormons are full-blown non-Trinitarian Christians.
Only if we disabuse the notion that words have meaning.Let’s just disabuse the notion that to be Christian one must believe in the doctrine of the Trinity.
Both the formal and the material doctrine of the Trinity are to be found in both the Old and New Testaments. While the early church councils were instrumental in the defense of the Trinity against those who rejected it, the Christians of those councils were Trinitarian because it is biblical.Harper’s Bible Dictionary states: “The formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the New Testament.”
I would disagree that the “formal doctrine” can be found anywhere in the Bible for the reasons I have already stated. It is an impossibility. We can certainly find the evidence for the Trinity in the Bible, but nothing like a formal exposition; a definitive statement using terms such as “Person” or “Being” or “Consubstantial”. That is the purpose of “formal” doctrine. While the doctrine certainly existed “materially” in the Church from the beginning, the formal expression of this truth developed later.Both the formal and the material doctrine of the Trinity are to be found in both the Old and New Testaments. While the early church councils were instrumental in the defense of the Trinity against those who rejected it, the Christians of those councils were Trinitarian because it is biblical.
If you’re talking about the terminology, yes. That is, the words chosen as descriptive.I would disagree that the “formal doctrine” can be found anywhere in the Bible for the reasons I have already stated. It is an impossibility. We can certainly find the evidence for the Trinity in the Bible, but nothing like a formal exposition; a definitive statement using terms such as “Person” or “Being” or “Consubstantial”. That is the purpose of “formal” doctrine. While the doctrine certainly existed “materially” in the Church from the beginning, the formal expression of this truth developed later.
The NT view of a Triune God is very evident.We Mormons are full-blown non-Trinitarian Christians.
Let’s just disabuse the notion that to be Christian one must believe in the doctrine of the Trinity.
Harper’s Bible Dictionary states: “The formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the New Testament.”
Matthew 27 (KJV)
*51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.*
Clearly, not a single Trinitarian was to be found among these resurrected early Christian Saints.
I am, because that is what “formal doctrine” means. The Church has held many beliefs as true without having them formally defined. In fact, a doctrine was usually never fully defined until it was challenged by heretics. That is when councils were formed and doctrines defined for the most part, in order to leave no doubt as to the teaching of the Church.If you’re talking about the terminology, yes. That is, the words chosen as descriptive.