Are Mormons Christians

[Porknpie]

Good question.“And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch”. (Acts 11:26). “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another”. (John 13:35) “Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him,** If ye continue in my word,** then are ye my disciples indeed.” (John 8:31)

And I would respond, that Mormons do not continue in the Word of God as revealed to his Church both in Tradition and Scripture by following a false prophet with a new gospel some 1800 years after the death of Christ.

Makes no sense that Christ would establish a Church, promise to lead it to all truth, promise to be with it forever and then let it immediately fail. And then to restore it by a adulterer with 36 wives who claimed to find buried treasure with a rock and a seller of miracle oil.

PnP

 

[TexanKnight]

Huge thanks to livingwaters, stephen, Rebecca, texan, et al for their well thought out responses. I just finished reading this entire thread and learned a lot.

To MtOly and other LDS apologetics, I have a few questions for you. Do you really believe that people, humans, can become gods? Do you really believe that our God used to be a human in another universe and, as a reward for being “good” was elevated to deity status and given this universe??

I doubt a Mormon will answer this. To do so means they have to lie and deny it or act like it is a misunderstood teaching.

But one only has to read js Follette Discourse or another lds “prophet” who said,

" as man is, God once was, as God is, man may become".

That says it all

 

[Stephen168]

Good question.

**Arius was a Christian at the beginning of the Nicene council in 325 AD but not after it was over. Those who would not sign the Necene creed were disposed as heretics. This was the begining of definition #2 below. **

1. The dictionary definition: “Christian - A person professing belief in Jesus as the Christ, or in the religion based on the teachings of Jesus.”

Mormons fit the dictionary definition of Christian. They did not write this definition, it is part of the English Language. Many Mormons don’t know there is any other definition and therefore don’t understand why some do not considered them to be Christian.

1. The Trinitarian definition: Those who believe in the triune God as described in the Nicene creed. This is the official definition of “Christian” of the Catholic Church and many of the protestant churches. This is OK. Mormons do not believe in the triune God and therefore when they understand the trinitarian definition, they will agree they are not trinitarian Christians.
2. The Biblical definition: This definition is put together using three verses from the Bible. The first tells us that a Christian is a disciple of Christ. The other verses tells us how we can know a disciple of Christ in the words of Jesus Himself:

“And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch”. (Acts 11:26). “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another”. (John 13:35) “Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed.” (John 8:31)

Christianity includes all three definitions. At its beginning Mormonism did too, until Joseph Smith lead his people into apostasy in 1844.

I don’t understand why you keep repeating ideas that have already been answered and then ignoring the answers.

 

[mtolympus]

I don’t understand why you keep repeating ideas that have already been answered and then ignoring the answers.

These three definitions still exist today. You saying they don’t, dosen’t make it so:

1. The dictionary definition: “Christian - A person professing belief in Jesus as the Christ, or in the religion based on the teachings of Jesus.”

Mormons fit the dictionary definition of Christian. They did not write this definition, it is part of the English Language. Many Mormons don’t know there is any other definition and therefore don’t understand why some do not considered them to be Christian.

1. The Trinitarian definition: Those who believe in the triune God as described in the Nicene creed. This is the official definition of “Christian” of the Catholic Church and many of the protestant churches. This is OK. Mormons do not believe in the triune God and therefore when they understand the trinitarian definition, they will agree they are not trinitarian Christians.
2. The Biblical definition: This definition is put together using three verses from the Bible. The first tells us that a Christian is a disciple of Christ. The other verses tells us how we can know a disciple of Christ in the words of Jesus Himself:

“And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch”. (Acts 11:26). “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another”. (John 13:35) “Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed.” (John 8:31)

**The following was comment made to address a specific question raised by nmgauss. This point has not been made before:

Arius was a Christian at the beginning of the Nicene council in 325 AD but not after it was over. Those who would not sign the Necene creed were disposed as heretics. This was the begining of definition #2.**

 

[mtolympus]

I doubt a Mormon will answer this. To do so means they have to lie and deny it or act like it is a misunderstood teaching.

But one only has to read js Follette Discourse or another lds “prophet” who said,

" as man is, God once was, as God is, man may become".

That says it all

**Yes, that does say it all. So then why should you or I try to embellish it?

That is called the law of eternal progession. It does not discribe the God in our scriptures we are taught about and worship. This is the discription of God from the LDS scriptures which has been previously posted:**

2 Nephi 31:21
And now, behold, my beloved brethren, this is the away; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God. And now, behold, this is the doctrine of Christ, and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is one God, without end. Amen.

Alma 11:44
Now, this restoration shall come to all, both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, both the wicked and the righteous; and even there shall not so much as a hair of their heads be lost; but every thing shall be restored to its perfect frame, as it is now, or in the body, and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit, which is one Eternal God, to be judged according to their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil.

Mormon 7:7
And he hath brought to pass the redemption of the world, whereby he that is found guiltless before him at the judgment day hath it given unto him to dwell in the presence of God in his kingdom, to sing ceaseless praises with the choirs above, unto the Father, and unto the Son, and unto the Holy Ghost, which are one God, in a state of happiness which hath no end.

Doctrine and Covenants 20:28
Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal, without end. Amen.

 

[Stephen168]

These three definitions still exist today. You saying they don’t, dosen’t make it so:

I never said they did not exist. I said

Christianity includes all three definitions. At its beginning Mormonism did too, until Joseph Smith lead his people into apostasy in 1844.

Which you ignore.

**The following was comment made to address a specific question raised by nmgauss. This point has not been made before:

Arius was a Christian at the beginning of the Nicene council in 325 AD but not after it was over. Those who would not sign the Necene creed were disposed as heretics. This was the begining of definition #2.**

Before the Council he didn’t have a position. Three years after the Council, Constantine come out as an Arian which he remained until his death. I believe if Constantine had been Orthodox, Arianism would have died out much quicker than it did.

The Second Ecumenical Council in 381AD declared that Arians were received into the Church via Confirmation only, therefore, their baptisms were valid. The same Council declared others, such as as Sabelianism, required baptism therefore their baptism were not valid.

It is more than a matter of theological correctness, in degrees. The intent must be that of the Church, which Mormonism does not have. Their view of Godhead is even far, far removed from Arianism. Arius never taught that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three Gods. His Christology was off, but he never professed a belief in more than one God, as Mormons do. This view, from Mormonism, describes another God altogether, not only a misunderstanding of the nature of God and the Person of Jesus Christ.

The Trinity is found in Scripture, but of course Catholics, are not sola scriptura. John 1:1 is a good place to start.

Constantine was an Arian and the Bishops were followers of the teachings of Christ and The Twelve. The Bishops received their authority through Apostolic Succession and the laying on of hands from Christ.

Joseph Smith invented apostles five years after he invented his religion. They were never leaders and seldom 12 until Brigham Young hijacked the church on the death of Joseph Smith.

Which you ignore

 

[taylorf]

It does not discribe the God in our scriptures we are taught about and worship.

No surprise. The LDS teaching of God has no scriptural basis but comes entirely from Joseph’s fantasy world. Brigham Young even tried to impose his own version with Adam-God, later declared false doctrine. The LDS God is pure fiction.

You keep ignoring this and instead keep posting scripture as if that clearly demonstrates LDS doctrine. You won’t even acknowledge that you believe God was once mortal, Christ was at one time our equal, and that Christ is our brother along with Satan. Nothing in scripture or early Christian history supports this view. Your belief rests solely on the word of one man who had a history of lying, cheating, manipulating, intimidating, and deceiving.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

**Yes, that does say it all. So then why should you or I try to embellish it?

That is called the law of eternal progession. It does not discribe the God in our scriptures we are taught about and worship. This is the discription of God from the LDS scriptures which has been previously posted:**

2 Nephi 31:21
And now, behold, my beloved brethren, this is the away; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God. And now, behold, this is the doctrine of Christ, and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is one God, without end. Amen.

Alma 11:44
Now, this restoration shall come to all, both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, both the wicked and the righteous; and even there shall not so much as a hair of their heads be lost; but every thing shall be restored to its perfect frame, as it is now, or in the body, and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit, which is one Eternal God, to be judged according to their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil.

Mormon 7:7
And he hath brought to pass the redemption of the world, whereby he that is found guiltless before him at the judgment day hath it given unto him to dwell in the presence of God in his kingdom, to sing ceaseless praises with the choirs above, unto the Father, and unto the Son, and unto the Holy Ghost, which are one God, in a state of happiness which hath no end.

Doctrine and Covenants 20:28
Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal, without end. Amen.

So, that is a “Yes”, and a “Yes” to my two questions?

 

[mtolympus]

I never said they did not exist. I said

Which you ignore.

Which you ignore

Sorry you feel ignored but there are 10 Catholic posts to every 1 LDS.

 

[Phntm]

**Yes, that does say it all. So then why should you or I try to embellish it?

That is called the law of eternal progession. It does not discribe the God in our scriptures we are taught about and worship. This is the discription of God from the LDS scriptures which has been previously posted:**

2 Nephi 31:21
And now, behold, my beloved brethren, this is the away; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God. And now, behold, this is the doctrine of Christ, and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is one God, without end. Amen.

Alma 11:44
Now, this restoration shall come to all, both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, both the wicked and the righteous; and even there shall not so much as a hair of their heads be lost; but every thing shall be restored to its perfect frame, as it is now, or in the body, and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit, which is one Eternal God, to be judged according to their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil.

Mormon 7:7
And he hath brought to pass the redemption of the world, whereby he that is found guiltless before him at the judgment day hath it given unto him to dwell in the presence of God in his kingdom, to sing ceaseless praises with the choirs above, unto the Father, and unto the Son, and unto the Holy Ghost, which are one God, in a state of happiness which hath no end.

Doctrine and Covenants 20:28
Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal, without end. Amen.

Have you looked into the verification of those prophets? Nephi claims that many precious and plain truths have been lost from the Bible. When did that occur? Dead Sea Scrolls provide pretty compelling evidence that the Old Testament hasn’t changed. Biblical scholarship shows that the New Testament is the same going back pretty far (earlier than 400 AD). In combination, looks like the Bible is pretty reliable which makes Nephi’s claims suspect.

What about Alma? Seems he predicted Jesus would be born in Jerusalem. Nope!

So, these two have about the same track record as Joseph Smith - makes sense, he invented them or stole them from a fiction author. Does salvation history seem pretty consistent, God works in certain way? Does Joseph Smith and/or Mormonism fit?

Have you seen Deut 13:1-5, 18:19-22, and 1 John 4:6. Makes sense? Then tack on Jer 17:9 & Proverbs 28:26. I know the Bible is considered secondary to Mormon scriptures, so much so they are completely disregarded when they disagree. However, our Lord Jesus Christ used them, and some I reference above we’re written when He walked the Earth, may want to consider the possibility that they still say what they did then and what they mean.

Do you have proof or evidence outside Joseph Smith for the proposed claims of Mormonism?

 

[Boatswain2PA]

Sorry you feel ignored but there are 10 Catholic posts to every 1 LDS.

So, I’ll keep asking. Was that a “yes”, and a “yes” to my questions?

 

[nmgauss]

Good question.

**Arius was a Christian at the beginning of the Nicene council in 325 AD but not after it was over. Those who would not sign the Necene creed were disposed as heretics. This was the begining of definition #2 below. **

1. The dictionary definition: “Christian - A person professing belief in Jesus as the Christ, or in the religion based on the teachings of Jesus.”

Mormons fit the dictionary definition of Christian. They did not write this definition, it is part of the English Language. Many Mormons don’t know there is any other definition and therefore don’t understand why some do not considered them to be Christian.

1. The Trinitarian definition: Those who believe in the triune God as described in the Nicene creed. This is the official definition of “Christian” of the Catholic Church and many of the protestant churches. This is OK. Mormons do not believe in the triune God and therefore when they understand the trinitarian definition, they will agree they are not trinitarian Christians.
2. The Biblical definition: This definition is put together using three verses from the Bible. The first tells us that a Christian is a disciple of Christ. The other verses tells us how we can know a disciple of Christ in the words of Jesus Himself:

“And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch”. (Acts 11:26). “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another”. (John 13:35) “Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed.” (John 8:31)

So, is it appropriate to specify which definition of the word “Christian” one is alluding to:
the dictionary one, the Nicene creed one, or the Biblical one?

In certain fundamentalist circles, Christian means “born again”. If you are not born again, you are not Christian.

 

[mtolympus]

Have you looked into the verification of those prophets? Nephi claims that many precious and plain truths have been lost from the Bible. When did that occur? Dead Sea Scrolls provide pretty compelling evidence that the Old Testament hasn’t changed. Biblical scholarship shows that the New Testament is the same going back pretty far (earlier than 400 AD). In combination, looks like the Bible is pretty reliable which makes Nephi’s claims suspect.

What about Alma? Seems he predicted Jesus would be born in Jerusalem. Nope!

My post was to show what our scriptures say about God and what we believe about God. I am not trying to prove anything to anyone.

Have you seen Deut 13:1-5, 18:19-22, and 1 John 4:6. Makes sense? Then tack on Jer 17:9 & Proverbs 28:26. I know the Bible is considered secondary to Mormon scriptures, so much so they are completely disregarded when they disagree. However, our Lord Jesus Christ used them, and some I reference above we’re written when He walked the Earth, may want to consider the possibility that they still say what they did then and what they mean.

Thank you! Sorry I can only answer one of your Bible scriptures since there seems to be so many posters who feel I am ignoring them.

The verses in Deuteronomy 13 teach us that the followers of a true prophet will be taught to keep God’s commandments and to obey his voice:

“If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the Lord your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul.” (Deut. 13:1-3)

Joseph Smith never taught that we should follow after other gods. All Latter-day Saint prophets have taught that we should follow the one true God and keep his commandments. This true God was identified to the children of Israel as “the Lord your God which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage.” (Deut. 13:5) The same God is described in The Book of Mormon: “And he loveth those who will have him to be their God… he did bring them out of the land of Egypt.” (1 Nephi 17:40) Latter-day Saints are taught by their prophets to serve God and do his will. They are taught to live by the same Ten Commandments that the Lord gave unto Moses. The fourth verse of Deuteronomy 13 confirms that followers who obey the commandments are the good fruits of a true prophet:

Ye shall walk after the Lord your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. (Deut. 13:4)

Do you have proof or evidence outside Joseph Smith for the proposed claims of Mormonism?

No. We don’t try to prove anything to anyone. The Bible dosen’t tell us to have faith in the evidence. The Bible tells us that faith is the evidence of unseen truth.

“Now faith is… the evidence of things not seen.” (Hebrews 11:1)

 

[Janderich]

Huge thanks to livingwaters, stephen, Rebecca, texan, et al for their well thought out responses. I just finished reading this entire thread and learned a lot.

To MtOly and other LDS apologetics, I have a few questions for you. Do you really believe that people, humans, can become gods?

Yes just like the Psalmist says, “Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High” (Psalms 82:6) Does a chicken grow up to be a horse? Does a dog grow up to be a fish? Are we children of God or not? Search inside yourself and see, it is the plainest logic that a child becomes like his parent.

Do you really believe that our God used to be a human in another universe and, as a reward for being “good” was elevated to deity status and given this universe??

I believe God used to be man like us. Yes, perhaps even a sinful man. I disagree with your comment about God being exalted simply for being “good”. However, I do not deny the power of God nor the divinity in man.

 

[Irish_Kathy]

Yes just like the Psalmist says, “Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High” (Psalms 82:6) Does a chicken grow up to be a horse? Does a dog grow up to be a fish? Are we children of God or not? Search inside yourself and see, it is the plainest logic that a child becomes like his parent.

I believe God used to be man like us. Yes, perhaps even a sinful man. I disagree with your comment about God being exalted simply for being “good”. However, I do not deny the power of God nor the divinity in man.

Then how do you justify this quote in Philippians?

In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage (or I personally prefer “grasped at”); rather, He made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death-- even death on a cross!

Philippians 2:5-8

He really is God and he HUMBLED HIMSELF for our sake and as an example to us of how to truly be children (with a small c) of God.

 

[Irish_Kathy]

Then how do you justify this quote in Philippians?

In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage (or I personally prefer “grasped at”); rather, He made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death-- even death on a cross!

Philippians 2:5-8

He really is God and he HUMBLED HIMSELF for our sake and as an example to us of how to truly be children (with a small c) of God.

Or this quote from Deuteronomy:

Deuteronomy 6:4-15 -

Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is ONE GOD.

 

[LivingWaters7]

I believe God used to be man like us. Yes, perhaps even a sinful man.

I must say, this was probably one of the most difficult things for me as a Latter-day Saint (along with the priesthood restriction). I simply could not wrap my head around the possibility of God once being not God, a sinful man (and that therefore there were men somewhere else prior to God creating man), progressing to Godhood.

 

[batman1973]

From Lutheran Satire (Sorry, I couldn’t resistt)
youtube.com/watch?v=FTwpOfr3NDQ

 

[Janderich]

Then how do you justify this quote in Philippians?

In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage (or I personally prefer “grasped at”); rather, He made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death-- even death on a cross!

Philippians 2:5-8

He really is God and he HUMBLED HIMSELF for our sake and as an example to us of how to truly be children (with a small c) of God.

Or the KJV, “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus; who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God…” This simply validates my point. Why is Paul telling us to have the same mindset as Christ in this matter? If we were of a different form he would not ask us to think it “not robbery to be equal with God” as Christ considered himself. Do you see the very analogy confirms the point?

That being said, you are correct about humility. I do not mean to say that we are like him at present. We all simply have the potential in us but it may be eons and eons of time before the righteous approach His attributes, His character. We currently are as nothing even lest then the dust of the earth for we do not at present follow him in all things but have gone our own way.

 

[zaffiroborant]

**Arius was a Christian at the beginning of the Nicene council in 325 AD but not after it was over. Those who would not sign the Necene creed were disposed as heretics.
**

Heretics are still Christians, Arius was remained a Christian after the council.