Is Mormonism Christian ?

[mfbukowski]

I
Galatians 1:6 (Thanks, Arandur! ):
“I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel–not that there is another gospel, but there are some who are confusing you and want to pervert the Gospel of Christ, but even if we or an angel (some translations “messenger”) from heaven** should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you,** let that one be accursed!”

Ah yes, but of course we believe that our gospel is the same gospel Paul proclaimed

On a personal note, I enjoy your posts and they always seem to be sincere. We don’t agree of course but I am confident you have chosen your name well. You seem to be a true truth seeker

 

[MelanieAnne]

But we do not believe that we can be Gods of our own planets. That would be a bit difficult, seeing that all the planets of the universe are taken–by the One Who Created the whole thing.

I know plenty of Mormons who believe they will be, or at least they have that opportunity. And they’re all right here where you live. I’ve heard more than one discussion of the subject, and lots of speculation of the possible circumstances. So you may not believe that you can be a God of your own planet, but some Mormons do.

 

[mfbukowski]

“O Truth, you are present to those who seek your help…. You respond clearly. But not everyone hears clearly… do not always hear the answer they wish. Your best servant is he who is intent not so much on hearing his petition answered, as rather on willing whatever he hears from you.”

• St. Augustine
  Thanks, MDK! I love that quote!

Me too! Sounds like continuing revelation to me! Was Augustine an unacknowledged “prophet”? I don’t know the answer, just throwing it out to cause trouble?!?!?!

I personally think Francis of Assisi was clearly an inspired man who might have been a “prophet” in another context.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Another great post.

Why the admonition against false prophets if there were to be no true prophets?

And Paul’s admonition against those who preach “another gospel” other than the one he preached? Obviously those who preached the same gospel were excluded from the admonition – implying that he expected that **others would come who preached the same gospel.
** (ie: he expected that revelation could continue)

bukowski, surely you know that the Catholic Church teaches that prophets exist. Still. Today. Prophecy is a special gift of grace. Not a position.

Jesus Christ is the head of the Catholic Church. He is our Prophet, our High Priest, our King.

Those with the gift of prophecy use it for the good of the church. You know very well that the Church recognizes prophetic events, such as Fatima.

A false prophet teaches counter to what Jesus taught. Say, that His Church would need to be restored. When He clearly promised otherwise.

 

[SSTeacher]

This is a great thread. At this point I don’t have anything to contribute but I wanted to subscribe to it.

I agree that it’s a very engaging thread. I do have a comment – well, half a dozen comments, actually.

Firstly, the formal name of the Church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints. This Church is undeniably Christian in name since it publicly identifies itself with the founder of Christianity in its chosen nomenclature.

Secondly, membership of the Church of Jesus Christ entails discipline (which word shares the same root as the word disciple). Is it not the case that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints are required not to smoke, drink alcohol, or wrongfully use drugs? Isn’t this the kind of lifestyle that one would expect of a Christian? One might even go so far as to say that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints produces good fruit.

Thirdly, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints are very intense about evangelism. There‘s no mistaking their enthusiasm and their commitment in this area. They send out their evangelists in pairs to knock on people’s doors, which method originated with Jesus (cf. Mark 6:7). Stand up the person who hasn’t had one of these home visits.

Fourthly, the historical record shows that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints have frequently been persecuted for standing up and declaring what they believe. Quite recently, for example, they took a stand against gay marriage.

Fifthly, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints assert that their beliefs are frequently misrepresented.

Sixthly, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints has experienced schisms, splits and disagreements.

I submit that most Christians whatever their doctrinal stance will be able to identify with all of the above characteristics. It appears, then, that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints shares at least some common ground with Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox Christians.

So, doctrinal differences aside, I guess I’m inclined toward the notion that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints is indeed Christian.

Ecumenically,
Mick

 

[1holycatholic]

The bible tells me all I need to know once I give place in my heart to Jesus.

:ehh:
The Bible doesn’t state that. You’re refuting yourself.

 

[mfbukowski]

ok dianaiad…I know I’m behind and I couldn’t get through this whole thread to see if this was addressed again, sorry . I just want to say that I am a former-Mormon and that there were some things that were left out during my lessons with the missionaries and the other 3-4 weeks of teaching I received. Along with the entire year that I was a FAITHFUL Mormon (read the BoM, Pearl of Great Price and D&C twice…always attended church, etc.). I was FLAT-OUT lied to by those that ‘cared about me’ and ‘taught me’ when I asked about the becoming like gods thing. By one person I was told that ‘no way, wow that would be neat…’ and the other I was told ‘it’s not EXACTLY like that…’. I was told that Mormons believe that Jesus was the archangel Michael and that this is his spirit name.

And yes, if you want to know I WILL tell you my ward and who my bishop was. I never went to the Temple because God made some pretty amazing things happen to stop me (talking a MAJOR snow storm…twice…when I was meant to go).

Again, sorry if this was re-addressed later, I only made it to about page 11 and didn’t see it. I normally don’t respond because there are many more ex-Mormons that are more knowledgable than I…Rebecca for one

I likewise am running behind and I am positive Dianaiad has answered this but I HAD to say something RIGHT NOW. As someone who has held leadership positions in the church and as a temple ordinance worker who has memorized virtually every temple ordinance and administered those ordinances, let me tell you without equivocation and very directly that Mormons do not believe that Jesus is Michael the Archangel. Totally wrong.

I think JW’s believe that, but I could be mistaken. If you think you were taught that in a Mormon context, either you were mistaken or those who taught that should be corrected. I have never ever heard that in a Mormon context. Period.

 

[Arandur]

No, that is the Jehovah’s Witnesses. You have us confused. We believe, and teach, that Jesus is the Jehovah of the OT; that He was God before His physical birth. Whoever told you that Jesus was Michael was seriously screwed up–or not LDS.

As for the ‘become gods’ thing…that’s a ‘mystery’ (the theological meaning, not the detective/secret meaning) we believe that we will be 'heirs and joint heirs with Christ and have all that he has" and follow that to wherever it leads; hence the famous couplet “as man is, God once was; as God is, man may become.”

But we do not believe that we can be Gods of our own planets. That would be a bit difficult, seeing that all the planets of the universe are taken–by the One Who Created the whole thing.

The Mormons over on mormonapologetics.org have more diverse views than you indicate, often with little harmony and much confusion between them. Many do take Joseph at his word in some of his later sermons, that literal godhood of other planets is what he spoke of.

As for Michael, as I recall it, it is not Jesus that Mormons believe is Michael so much as it was Adam. Michael became Adam willingly in Mormon mythos, choosing to be sent by God to earth as a man for the purpose, essentially, of committing what they call the necessary sin. What an evil idea.

Jesus is Satan’s spirit-brother, though, from what I’ve heard most Mormons say.

Was not Christ man? Are we not to be ‘heirs and joint-heirs’ with Christ?

Yes and yes. It just does not mean what Mormons think it means. After all, in Revelation we catch a glimpse of life in heaven, where the Apostles sit on thrones and share in the work of the Kingdom, but they are not gods.

 

[mfbukowski]

Congratulations, Jea9! :clapping: You are so blessed to have been directed by God, and to have been open to His grace!
What you are saying is not uncommon of a testimony among converts from LDS, that many things were not told up front or admitted about their beliefs. It seems as if it is because all of the major teachings are exactly what ancient scripture has warned us about as false religions and prophets, and they know it. If one says “God is an alien polygamist.” LDS will freak out. But if you wade through the distracting terminology and realize that God came from another planet and has many spirit wives, well, that is what one could conclude. Even the latter description just sounds “mean”, and so it is perceived as an attack, especially since LDS are taught that we are relentless attackers of the “truth” that they themselves are the only ones in possession of. In real truth, it is a blunt observation, just cutting through the bull doo doo.

OOPS forget all the nice things I said. I goofed about you.

This is not what we believe and appears to be an intentional distortion.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Me too! Sounds like continuing revelation to me! Was Augustine an unacknowledged “prophet”? I don’t know the answer, just throwing it out to cause trouble?!?!?!

Prophets (Church approved private revelationsl)…yes, St Augustine is on the list.

In case you need the definitions:

Public Revelation: All prophecies that pertain to the Salvation of mankind. This includes the OT prophets, the Apostles and Jesus Christ. Jesus is the Perfect Revelation regarding our Salvation. For this reason, public Revelation is not necessary, as Jesus Revealed all that the Church needs to bring people to Salvation.

Private revelation: St Thomas Aquinas said “not indeed for the declaration of any new doctrine of faith, but for the direction of human acts”. Thus, private revelation is given by the grace of God to individuals. Such revelations are for the benefit and direction of the individual and are not binding on the Church.

Certainly, we can and do find private revelations beneficial. However, they add nothing to what Christ Himself Revealed.

The list above are prophets who received private revelation.

The Church does not accept any prophecy that adds to or takes away from what Jesus Revealed. These are in fact the sort of prophecies that fall under the category: against the gospel that has been taught to you.

"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are of God"** (1 John 4:1).**

 

[Arandur]

This is an excellent point and the core issue.

Why did it stop?

Answered on the middle and end of page 18. In short: “continuing revelation” is not what you think it is.

 

[mfbukowski]

Sometimes Scripture is recursive, referring to things in the past; often this is a method of verifying something that happened or is just a warning of a pattern. His explanation was therefore possible. This is the first I’ve heard of it, so I won’t vouch for it, however.

As for what else “a falling away” could mean, I did offer that answer. Just about any “falling away” will do. It says nothing of a loss of priesthood, death of the Church/death of the Body of Christ. It is an exhortation and warning to be alert and hold fast to the truth, like so many others will. It is a warning not to become complacent, for Satan will always attempt to deceive–whether you believe the “man of perdition” is to be related directly to Satan or just a great confounder of Christ’s message through his own pride and foolishness, this was a warning that such people would come. We must be on our guard for deceptions and be true to the Church. Such warnings require no loss of priesthood. Indeed, if I recall correctly, much of the D&C has similar exhortations to hold fast and beware of fallings away, apostasies, and so forth. Which means that if the LDS sect can hold together despite that (as you obviously believe it has), so can have the Catholic Church. An instance right here where by trying to justify your own church’s continued existence, you actually defeat your own argument against the Catholic Church.

Nope. It says the second coming will not ocurr until after a falling away. It is not a personal falling away – read it in context

 

[Arandur]

Another great post.

Why the admonition against false prophets if there were to be no true prophets?

False prophets can mean anyone who preaches differently, who claims to have special revelation.

It is a non sequitur to assume that a statement of “false prophets” requires there to be “true prophets.” There can be only false prophets. That aside, note that prophecy was a gift, not an office. It does not mean what you think it means. Prophets as referenced in the Bible did much more than give new revelation or make predictions. They admonished and warned, primarily. They taught, as part of that mission. We Catholics are properly baptized “Priest, Prophet, and King,” since we are baptized into Christ, who was all three and unified the gifts in himself to impart them to us as we become unified in him.

And Paul’s admonition against those who preach “another gospel” other than the one he preached? Obviously those who preached the same gospel were excluded from the admonition – implying that he expected that **others would come who preached the same gospel.
** (ie: he expected that revelation could continue)

Here you seem to be admitting that there were those who preached the same Gospel–and by extension, that there had to be some method for preserving that Gospel to judge the preaching by, and for knowing that the “others” were authoritative. Yet LDS can’t explain what those methods were; the Church can.

As for your “i.e,” that is non sequitur, as well. Others can come to preach what was already revealed without giving new revelation. There is no connection between what Paul said and “continuing revelation.”

 

[look3467]

:ehh:
The Bible doesn’t state that. You’re refuting yourself.

Which is it, the glass half empty or the glass half full?

I see both sides in that I see it as mid point.

I f I were marooned on an isolated island by myself, knowing not about God, I would look around and wonder at the creation.

I mean, I would think, how did all this come about? Surely something within me would lead me to wonder.

But what if, I found a bible laying there, read it from cover to cover, would it not be sufficient for me to find God, the creator of all my wonder?

And if I did find God, and I lived and I died, what would be the results of my discovery?

In Gods view or our view, which would it be, heaven or hell?

Peace>>>AJ

 

[Arandur]

Nope. It says the second coming will not ocurr until after a falling away. It is not a personal falling away – read it in context

Did you read the latter paragraph you quoted? Any of the great heresies is a “falling away.” As Revelation explains, there is a cycle of Satan attacking the Church constantly, and leading many astray. Not all, as Revelation points out clearly. So in the early centuries, we have Arianism, Modalism, etc. Then we get Islam, which was the first to claim almost exactly what Joseph Smith claims as far as justification and origin. Then we have Protestantism, which is the devil rehashing a lot of the early heresies in new form (he’s really not very creative). Then we have the modern heresies, including evangelicalism and Smithianism (which is Islam rehashed and couched in different terms).

Each of these heresies fulfills that reference to “a falling away.”

 

[mfbukowski]

So you say.

Indeed, since Mormons neither worship nor pray to Jesus Christ, it is a mystery as to WHY they would fuss over the term “Christian”. Mormonism is not a Christ-centered faith. Why fuss over the term “Christian”?

Totally untrue! I don’t know where you get this stuff!?

Jesus Christ is the center of my entire life. The name of the church is the Church of Jesus Christ. We pray every prayer in his name. We worship him and adore him as the savior of the world, as God, and as the Word, or Jehovah, Yahweh of the old testament, he is the creator and organizer of this universe.

The gospel of Jesus Christ has transformed my life inside and out through his healing grace. I was an alchoholic and drug addict in my early years and it was through Jesus Christ that I have been transformed. Jesus Christ is preached in the Book of Mormon. All the temple ordinances are centered around Jesus Christ. These are nothing but lies and distortions.

Don’t tell me I am not Christian. Believe what you like – I honestly don’t care who you call christian or not. But don’t for one second dare to tell me that I do not believe in Jesus Christ. I would die for him and my beliefs without a moment’s hesitation.

Say what you will — it is foolish and petty. You just don’t understand us at all and make no effort to do so.

You believe cartoons and caricatures of what we believe invented by anti mormon liars. If you want to believe that, go ahead.

It is like me taking Jack Chick as a true source of knowledge about Catholicism. If you want to know about Mormons, ask Mormons.

 

[Arandur]

Me too! Sounds like continuing revelation to me! Was Augustine an unacknowledged “prophet”? I don’t know the answer, just throwing it out to cause trouble?!?!?!

I personally think Francis of Assisi was clearly an inspired man who might have been a “prophet” in another context.

In the proper context, they both were.

Does it take “continuing revelation” to tell the truth, to explain truth, to understand truth, or to advise truthfully? No, it just requires an understanding of what has been revealed, since all has already been revealed. If revelation was complete in the incarnation and Divine Institution of the Church, then God is no longer keeping secrets from us. This is a much grander and more glorious reality than the selfishness of the much more distant god that LDS preach.

 

[RebeccaJ]

I agree that it’s a very engaging thread. I do have a comment – well, half a dozen comments, actually.

Firstly, the formal name of the Church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints. This Church is undeniably Christian in name since it publicly identifies itself with the founder of Christianity in its chosen nomenclature.

You can call your church whatever you like, it doesn’t mean anything. It is nothing but marketing. Like, “Whole Wheat Bread”, to let people know that the bread might contain some whole wheat.

Secondly, membership of the Church of Jesus Christ entails discipline (which word shares the same root as the word disciple). Is it not the case that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints are required not to smoke, drink alcohol, or wrongfully use drugs? Isn’t this the kind of lifestyle that one would expect of a Christian?

Ummm, the Apostles taught against drunkenness, they also drank wine, with Jesus. Jesus turned water into wine at a wedding. What do you think? Was Jesus a Christian?

Not using drugs (recreationally) falls under soberness.

Smoking, is a health hazard. I have never seen anything taught by Jesus or the Apostles about health hazards in general. Or, smoking in particular.

One might even go so far as to say that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints produces good fruit.

So do many organizations. This doesn’t indicate anything about the vine itself. The vine, your church, is not of the vine that Jesus planted. It is something other.

Thirdly, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints are very intense about evangelism. There‘s no mistaking their enthusiasm and their commitment in this area. They send out their evangelists in pairs to knock on people’s doors, which method originated with Jesus (cf. Mark 6:7). Stand up the person who hasn’t had one of these home visits.

Mormons don’t evangelize, the proselytize. There is a difference.

Fourthly, the historical record shows that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints have frequently been persecuted for standing up and declaring what they believe. Quite recently, for example, they took a stand against gay marriage.

Yes, and?

Fifthly, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints assert that their beliefs are frequently misrepresented.

Apparently, most often by your own prophets.

Sixthly, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints has experienced schisms, splits and disagreements.

Again, what’s your point?

I submit that most Christians whatever their doctrinal stance will be able to identify with all of the above characteristics. It appears, then, that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints shares at least some common ground with Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox Christians.

So, doctrinal differences aside, I guess I’m inclined toward the notion that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints is indeed Christian.

Ecumenically,
Mick

Sorry. You can’t sweep the heresies of Mormonism under the rug that easily.

Islam also has many things in common with Mormonism. Are you Islamic? No alcohol. Schisms. Persecutions. Misrepresented beliefs.

Or, Mormonism has more in common with the Restorationist movement than it does Chrisitianity. Seventh Day Adventist and Jehovah Witnesses. Why do you think Mormons are confused so often with JWs?

 

[mfbukowski]

We know that there is one God in three Persons. This is Who God is. Any other attempted definition is out of touch with reality, or in blunt words, insane.

The Book of Mormon teaches that there is one God in three persons.

You believe that the source of their unity is “being” which I don’t even know what that means.

We believe that the source of their unity is “purpose”. I know what that means.

That is the only difference

 

[mfbukowski]

So. In conclusion,

Mormons aren’t Christian. They claim to be, but their definition is distorted because they fail to recognize the Trinity–the central core of Christianity.

Joseph Smith was not a prophet of God, but was a religious leader who distanced himself and his followers from Christianity.

In the past, Mormons have rejoiced in their differences from Christianity. Today, they claim they are by redefining terms thereby making their heresy more palatable to the unknowing.

in Christ
Steph

You know the BOM teaches one God in three persons. I don’t care if you call me Christian or not. I rejoice in Mormonism. I know that Jesus Christ suffered and died for me and has been and is the savior of my life.

Sticks and stone swill break my bones but names will never hurt me. Lie all you like. You will be held accountable for it. I don’t know how much because most of it is in ignorance… I hope for your sakes.