Is mormonism Christian?

[StLawrenceFan]

Heh - IMO, there’s no single “Christ of the Bible”. The Jesus of the Gospels doesn’t bear a whole lot of resemblance to Paul’s Christ in the Epistles.

–I’m not sure what you mean.
Jesus is God. The Bible is the inspired word of God.
As to your question as to what is Christine Doctrine, you can refer so many places on the internet. This particular site is a good one since it links to actual Biblical passages.
Here.

There is only one God - Isaiah 43:10; 44:6, 8; John 17:3; 1 Cor. 8:5-6; Gal. 4:8-9

God is a Trinity - 2 Cor. 13:14; 1 Pet. 1:2

There are no Gods before or after God - Isaiah 43:10

mormons believe that if they’re really really really good…they can become a God (or God-like).

mormons also believe God was once a man “like us” and a truck full of other ridiculously whacky stuff all found here.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

As far as I know, the Mormon church does not officially say that Jesus Christ was married. They may allow for that belief, but I’ve never read anything that says that Jesus was married in Mormon belief, at least not yet. Also, Orthodox Christians do not believe He was married. Your mainstream Protestant friends may be stating their opinions, however it seems as if the vast majority of mainstream Christian churches believe that Jesus Christ was not married.

Yes you are absolutely correct, most mainstream Christians do not believe Jesus was married.

However I have read some books by Protestants who say that Jesus may have been married to Mary Magdelene. But that is pure speculation, because there is nothing that indicates anything of the kind in the Scriptures.

 

[StLawrenceFan]

As far as I know, the Mormon church does not officially say that Jesus Christ was married. They may allow for that belief, but I’ve never read anything that says that Jesus was married in Mormon belief, at least not yet.

Operative word “Yet”…please read here…

 

[gearhead]

As to your question as to what is Christine Doctrine, you can refer so many places on the internet. This particular site is a good one since it links to actual Biblical passages.
Here.

There is only one God - Isaiah 43:10; 44:6, 8; John 17:3; 1 Cor. 8:5-6; Gal. 4:8-9

Hmm. I have a feeling you didn’t actually look up those passages before you read them. Some support your position, some are ambiguous, and this one (1 Cor 8:5-6) especially stands out. Note the part I’ve bolded:

5For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords,

6yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.

IOW, it seems to advocate henotheism (the belief in many gods but the worship of one) rather than monotheism.

God is a Trinity - 2 Cor. 13:14; 1 Pet. 1:2

Again, I’m not sure that you read these before you posted them. They both mention the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but they don’t spell out things in a way that says the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity is right and the Mormon concept of the Godhead is wrong.

There are no Gods before or after God - Isaiah 43:10

Here’s the passage:

10"You are My witnesses," declares the LORD,
     "And My servant whom I have chosen,
     So that you may know and believe Me
     And understand that I am He 
     Before Me there was no God formed,
     And there will be none after Me.

IMO, several interpretations work just fine with this. One that immediately comes to mind is this: there is one chief God, who either created or allowed to be created all other gods These gods serve the chief God and are dependent on him to the extent that when that God leaves/dies/ends, the other gods will cease as well.

mormons believe that if they’re really really really good…they can become a God (or God-like).

And how does that make them not Christian?

mormons also believe God was once a man “like us” and a truck full of other ridiculously whacky stuff all found here.

And how does this conflict with the Bible or “Christian doctrine”? The Bible is silent on what God did before he created the universe.

 

[ThurifAcolyte]

IOW, it seems to advocate henotheism (the belief in many gods but the worship of one) rather than monotheism.

Not necessarily, because in the context of the chapter (1 Cor 8), it is talking about food sacrificed to idols. So in our interpretation, yes, there are many “so-called” gods, whether on Heaven or on Earth, however in reality, there is only one God.

So, henotheism is not necessarily the only interpretation of that.

I think you quoted from the NASB, so here is the chapter for reference:

1 Corinthians 8 NASB:

1Now concerning things sacrificed to idols, we know that we all have knowledge Knowledge makes arrogant, but love edifies.

2If anyone supposes that he knows anything, he has not yet known as he ought to know;

3but if anyone loves God, he is known by Him.

4Therefore concerning the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that [a]there is no such thing as an idol in the world, and that there is no God but one.

5For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords,

6yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.

7However not all men have this knowledge; but some, being accustomed to the idol until now, eat food as if it were sacrificed to an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.

8But food will not commend us to God; we are neither the worse if we do not eat, nor the better if we do eat.

9But take care that this liberty of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak.

10For if someone sees you, who have knowledge, dining in an idol’s temple, will not his conscience, if he is weak, be strengthened to eat things sacrificed to idols?

11For through your knowledge he who is weak is ruined, the brother for whose sake Christ died.

12And so, by sinning against the brethren and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ.

13Therefore, if food causes my brother to stumble, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause my brother to stumble.

 

[gearhead]

Not necessarily, because in the context of the chapter (1 Cor 8), it is talking about food sacrificed to idols. So in our interpretation, yes, there are many “so-called” gods, whether on Heaven or on Earth, however in reality, there is only one God.

So, henotheism is not necessarily the only interpretation of that.

I didn’t say it was. The question here isn’t whether the mainstream Christian interpretation works with the passage - I agree that it does. The real question is whether an interpretation that supports the Mormon view might be reasonable as well. It seems to me that it is reasonable.

And BTW: “don’t worship that god” is not equivalent to “that god doesn’t exist”. That’s the point I was trying to make when I mentioned henotheism.

 

[Bluegoat]

I didn’t say it was. The question here isn’t whether the mainstream Christian interpretation works with the passage - I agree that it does. The real question is whether an interpretation that supports the Mormon view might be reasonable as well. It seems to me that it is reasonable.

And BTW: “don’t worship that god” is not equivalent to “that god doesn’t exist”. That’s the point I was trying to make when I mentioned henotheism.

Luckily, we have brains also, which tell us that more than one self-existent underlying principle is not a logical belief.

We can also look, if we want, to other parts of scripture which give a clearer idea of the nature of God, which suggests the interpretation that there are many gods is questionable.

 

[dianaiad]

As far as I know, the Mormon church does not officially say that Jesus Christ was married. They may allow for that belief, but I’ve never read anything that says that Jesus was married in Mormon belief, at least not yet. Also, Orthodox Christians do not believe He was married. Your mainstream Protestant friends may be stating their opinions, however it seems as if the vast majority of mainstream Christian churches believe that Jesus Christ was not married.

…and we Mormons…don’t know one way or the other. Is it important?

 

[StLawrenceFan]

…and we Mormons…don’t know one way or the other. Is it important?

Of course it’s important. It’s called historical accuracy. Big surprise mormons don’t know or don’t care. Some (or most?) mormons think Jesus was born in Jerusalem. LOL.

But historical truths and lying blatantly about history and religion didn’t bother Joe Smith or Joe’s Myth. Same with Bring’em Young. Joe and his bogus “seer stone” dreams were spread to a close few. I wonder if Joe could really impart his bizarre ramblings with a straight face? Joe and Bring’em. What a crew. Those clowns didn’t care about the truth, they just wanted to start their own religion. Joe shoulda just stuck to selling booze outta his home. Woulda been safer that way.

But alas, Con men are great at spinning yarns, and as my hero PT Barnum said, “there’s a sucker born every minute”.

Recovery from mormonism is just a click away…

 

[dianaiad]

Of course it’s important. It’s called historical accuracy. Big surprise mormons don’t know or don’t care. Some (or most?) mormons think Jesus was born in Jerusalem. LOL.

No. We believe that He was born in the LAND of Jerusalem, in a town called Bethlehem, and the way the Book of Mormon puts it is not even a little bit out of whack, or uncommon.

As for historical accuracy, yeah, it could be important for that IF there was evidence one way or another, but there isn’t. The real question is this: how important is it to our salvation that we believe that Jesus was, or was not, married? What difference does it make to the idea of Him as Savior? <snip rest of insult…I don’t know why I bring you out of the plonked field at all. I just keep hoping that your method of discourse will, eventually, change into something resembling courtesy and reason, but…well…

guess not. Back to the ignore folder, I guess.>

 

[StLawrenceFan]

No. We believe that He was born in the LAND of Jerusalem, in a town called Bethlehem…

So great to hear the truth! Glad.

As for historical accuracy, yeah, it could be important for that IF there was evidence one way or another, but there isn’t.

–LOL!

Sure thing. Just read the Bible and steer clear of ANYTHING Joe ever said. (that’s the key).

Nothing in the book of mormon can be archaeologically or anthropologically proven.
Any specific place in the Bible can.

See the diff?

Basic stuff.

Anyone with any sense laughs at Joe Smith the con man.

 

[Doxiemom]

I thought Benedict addressed Mormonism when he came to America.

he did not say that they were not Christian but that they had serious deviations from Scripture.

If they say they are christian, i will take their word on it and let God decide.

I would hope many non-catholic christians would take the same view of catholicism, for to them, some of the stuff that comes out of the catholic church can seem very odd also.

 

[Contarini]

This is off topic, but why do you say that the Muslims don’t accept the Bible as inspired? I know that they don’t think Jesus was the Son of God, but they think he was a great prophet along the lines of Moses and Elijah.

Yes, but they don’t think that the Bible as we have it is a reliable record of what Jesus or the other prophets did and taught, let alone divinely inspired.

They believe that the Qur’an contains the true, divinely inspired account of Jesus. Never mind that it also contains absurdities like Mary being the sister of Aaron (they can explain this away, of course, just as Christian fundamentalists explain away the generally less glaring discrepancies in the Bible).

Edwin

 

[Bluegoat]

Yes, but they don’t think that the Bible as we have it is a reliable record of what Jesus or the other prophets did and taught, let alone divinely inspired.

They believe that the Qur’an contains the true, divinely inspired account of Jesus. Never mind that it also contains absurdities like Mary being the sister of Aaron (they can explain this away, of course, just as Christian fundamentalists explain away the generally less glaring discrepancies in the Bible).

Edwin

Well, I think looking at whether we think any supposedly revealed religious text is inspired is a bit tricky, and a matter at some level of trust. That isn’t to say we don’t have good reasons, and that some texts may be obviously fabricated.

But in the end, does any of us know, rationally, for sure, that the Bible is divinely inspired? And it too has some strange and difficult to believe parts.

I think for some who find Islam more plausible, (or Judaism for that matter,) the Trinity and Incarnation are just so impossible, and seem so opposed to what they know is true about God, that Biblical reliability seems to be no better than Joe Smith’s.

And although I disagree, I can understand that POV. It is by no means the least logical thing have heard (in fact, I think it’s problem may be that it is too logical, but that is a different discussion.)

 

[gearhead]

Nothing in the book of mormon can be archaeologically or anthropologically proven.
Any specific place in the Bible can.

See the diff?

Basic stuff.

Anyone with any sense laughs at Joe Smith the con man.

Okay… prove Sodom and Gomorrah. Or Eden.

I like how you couched your language by saying “place”, since historical and archaeological evidence strongly argues against several of the key events of the Bible. The two that immediately come to mind are the Exodus and Herod’s slaughter of the infants. Also there’s the Flood, but I realize that many Christians no longer consider it to be a literal, historical event… but if you do, then the problem is even greater for that event.

Also, there are trivial details like the problem of when Jesus was born: according to the Gospels, it was while Herod was king of Judea and Quirinius was governor of Syria. The only problem is that these two things never happened at the same time. There’s a ten-year gap from when Herod died (4 BC) until when Quirinius became governor (6 AD). However, that’s minor compared to historical problems with major theological implications like the Exodus.

Sometimes I get the feeling that it’s only the passage of time that makes the Bible seem more reasonable than the Book of Mormon in terms of historical accuracy.

 

[StLawrenceFan]

Sometimes I get the feeling that it’s only the passage of time that makes the Bible seem more reasonable than the Book of Mormon in terms of historical accuracy.

LOL. However, there is no historical accuracy to Joe’s Myth; there is not one thread of archaeological or anthropological evidence whatsoever - especially Joe’s phoney ‘gold plates’, great cities, Israelites coming to North America, etc etc. Not one shred.

If you want historical proof of the Bible - archaeologically or anthropologically, it’s all over the Internet and in many published books. Just do your research, is all.

If you’d like, you can check here (for example)…or here for starters…

I thought Benedict addressed Mormonism when he came to America…he did not say that they were not Christian but that they had serious deviations from Scripture.

–Do you have a link to that? I do not recall that ever happening. Mormonism isn’t even a blip on the Christian radar, so if it was mentioned, it was surely (and simply) out of politeness. However, I never recall the Pope even mentioning it. Any Pope.

If they say they are christian, i will take their word on it and let God decide.

–And that’s your perogative, but it clearly shows a vast inaccuracy and a very limited understanding of the topic we are discussing. Just keep in mind that God told us to beware of false prophets. Joe Smith and subsequent mormon “church” leaders were and are all false prophets. As pointed out in this thread (if you’d read it and research it) you’ll find that Joe Smith dreamed-up his religion because he somehow felt that Chistianity had failed. What did he know? He was just an uneducated fellah living in a rural environment - far from the real world. Joe was great at duping people with his “seer stones” and his big talk.

Jesus Christ had died for us 1,820 years prior and had created the One True Church. Joe didn’t understand or comprehend that in the slightest.
Keep your eyes open for false prophets because they’re still around…

----Please watch this video…and any related videos. They will help provide you information and truth.

 

[Contarini]

Well, I think looking at whether we think any supposedly revealed religious text is inspired is a bit tricky, and a matter at some level of trust. That isn’t to say we don’t have good reasons, and that some texts may be obviously fabricated.

But in the end, does any of us know, rationally, for sure, that the Bible is divinely inspired? And it too has some strange and difficult to believe parts.

I think for some who find Islam more plausible, (or Judaism for that matter,) the Trinity and Incarnation are just so impossible, and seem so opposed to what they know is true about God, that Biblical reliability seems to be no better than Joe Smith’s.

And although I disagree, I can understand that POV. It is by no means the least logical thing have heard (in fact, I think it’s problem may be that it is too logical, but that is a different discussion.)

I’m not quite sure where you are going with this. I don’t think you are disagreeing with anything I said. All I said was that while Mormons add their own scriptures to the Bible, Muslims regard the Qur’an as inspired and the Bible as a corrupted, distorted record of what God’s prophets taught.

That is one important thing that Mormons and orthodox Christians have in common which Christians do not have with Muslims.

I did not intend to embark on a comparison of various allegedly inspired texts, which would be another subject.

Edwin

 

[Bluegoat]

I’m not quite sure where you are going with this. I don’t think you are disagreeing with anything I said. All I said was that while Mormons add their own scriptures to the Bible, Muslims regard the Qur’an as inspired and the Bible as a corrupted, distorted record of what God’s prophets taught.

That is one important thing that Mormons and orthodox Christians have in common which Christians do not have with Muslims.

I did not intend to embark on a comparison of various allegedly inspired texts, which would be another subject.

Edwin

No, i’m not disagreeing. Simply saying that there is always an element of faith in our confidence in revealed texts - For Mormons, Catholics, or Muslims.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

No, i’m not disagreeing. Simply saying that there is always an element of faith in our confidence in revealed texts - For Mormons, Catholics, or Muslims.

Yes you are very right about this, and that is why it is important to respect other people’s faiths, because they truly believe in their own religion and practice it and are obedient to its precepts. (Unless they don’t - which is between them and their consciences).

“Faith is to believe what you do not see; the reward of this faith is to see what you believe.”

Saint Augustine

 

[why_me]

I thought Benedict addressed Mormonism when he came to America.

he did not say that they were not Christian but that they had serious deviations from Scripture.

If they say they are christian, i will take their word on it and let God decide.

I would hope many non-catholic christians would take the same view of catholicism, for to them, some of the stuff that comes out of the catholic church can seem very odd also.

You are a voice of reason on the mormon threads, threads in which many catholics mock and bash the lds church. Thank you.