Is mormonism Christian?

[StLawrenceFan]

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

Except that the words “reason” and “mormon” are incongruous.
And there’s no “mocking” or “bashing”, there is just truth. And the truth is out there all over the place. mormons have every right to practice their cultish ways, but they have no right to call themselves “Christian”. That’s what this thread is about.

It’s refreshing to note (from this thread and zillions of others, elsewhere) that mormons are not Christian; not even in the slightest. It’s not all their fault, it’s Joe’s Myth and Bring’ems propagation of twisted truths and flat-out religious folly that have led lds’ers astray.

 

[StLawrenceFan]

Two other wonderful sites for mormons to read:

Here

and

Here…

 

[Doxiemom]

I do not have a link but i watched the pope live on Tv and he did address the subject of mormonism.

I am fully aware of ‘false prophets’ and agree 100% with Benedict. Some wear the roman collar and want to elevate mary even further up nearing a trinity plus one sort of faith.

I would stay away from using the cult word. that is the mud thrown into my face too often just because i am ‘catholic’. It is not a useful word.

And may God help us if being "wrong’, even if we really truely believe we are right, Love God, love Jesus, , we still are sent to hell.

Is not this whole subject addressed in the catachism as the natural law of the heart?

Jesus said to love one another as I have loved you. Do mormons believe that they are fulfilling this truth? i believe they do, even if I think their ‘faith’ is in part incorrect.

There are bad people who will deserve hell and they come in all flavors of religion.

 

[PaulDupre]

Of course it is.

All of you bigoted people who have a problem with my church for whatever reason – and yet you will say Catholics and Protestants are Christian.

You base your conclusion that we “are not Christian” on the same recycled false garbage that continues to get spread about.

Yes the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is. Why not ask me or someone you know who is a member instead of buying into the recycled false garbage.

court, it is obvious that you know very little about Mormon history and doctrine. Try reading the D&C, PoGP, History of the Church, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, the Lectures on Faith, and Journal of Discourses some time. You will see that every objection that non-Mormons have to Mormonism is due to the writings of your own prophets and apostles. We don’t need to make up things to criticize. Your GAs have given us all the material we will ever need. You just don’t know about any of it.

The LDS church you believe in does not exist except in your own mind. You are either very young, very naive or both.

Go learn something. Then come back and discuss.

BTW, I was LDS for 11 years, served a mission, married in the temple, held many callings including Gospel Essentials teacher, Gospel Doctrine teacher, etc. So I know whereof I speak. In the course of preparing lessons for my classes, I learned the truth about Mormon history and the teachings of the early LDS leaders. That is why I left.

 

[PaulDupre]

I think I’ve heard that, too. I know they have changed tack on the trinity in the last 35 years. Maybe one of the ex-mormons could fill us in.

When I was LDS (1975-1986) we definitely did not want to be called “Christians”. We followed the counsel of Brigham Young who said that Christians were “as ignorant of the things of God as the brute beasts of the field”. We did not want to be lumped in with* them*.

My mission president told us that when people asked us if we were Christians, we should say “no, we are latter-day saints”.

It is very amusing to me that Mormons suddenly want to be those brute beasts of the field.

 

[PaulDupre]

IOW, there is no “right” set of doctrines and beliefs that are considered authoritative in the way that the CCC is in the Catholic Church. In a “priesthood of all believers” with no intermediaries between the believer and Christ, every believer is equally authoritative.

The Catholic Church also believes in the common priesthood of all the faithful. All baptized Christians share in the one priesthood of Christ.

The ministerial or hierarchical priesthood of bishops and priests, and the common priesthood of all the faithful participate, “each in its own proper way, in the one priesthood of Christ.” While being “ordered one to another,” they differ essentially. In what sense? While the common priesthood of the faithful is exercised by the unfolding of baptismal grace --a life of faith, hope, and charity, a life according to the Spirit–, the ministerial priesthood is at the service of the common priesthood. It is directed at the unfolding of the baptismal grace of all Christians. The ministerial priesthood is a means by which Christ unceasingly builds up and leads his Church. For this reason it is transmitted by its own sacrament, the sacrament of Holy Orders.

• The Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1574

 

[PaulDupre]

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.

Here are some statements from early Mormon prophets and apostles teaching that Jesus was married and had children:

“I discover that some of the Eastern papers represent me as a great blasphemer, because I said, in my lecture on Marriage, at our last Conference, that Jesus Christ was married at Cana of Galilee, that Mary, Martha, and others were his wives, and that he begat children.”
(President Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v2, p210)

“It will be borne in mind that once on a time, there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and on a careful reading of that transaction, it will be discovered that no less a person than Jesus Christ was married on that occasion. If he was never married, his intimacy with Mary and Martha [the sisters of Lazarus] and the other Mary also whom Jesus loved [Mary Magdelene], must have been highly unbecoming and improper to say the best of it.”
(Apostle Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses 4:259)

One thing is certain, that there were several holy women that greatly loved Jesus - such as Mary, and Martha her sister, and Mary Magdalene; and Jesus greatly loved them, and associated with them much; and when He arose from the dead, instead of first showing Himself to His chosen witnesses, the Apostles, He appeared first to these women, or at least to one of them - namely, Mary Magdalene. Now, it would be very natural for a husband in the resurrection to appear first to his own dear wives, and afterwards show himself to his other friends. If all the acts of Jesus were written, we no doubt should learn that these beloved women were his wives. (Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, p. 159)

“We say it was Jesus Christ who was married, to be brought into the relation whereby he could see his seed, before He was crucified. “Has he indeed passed by the nature of angels, and taken upon himself the seed of Abraham, to die without leaving a seed to bear his name on the earth?” No. But when the secret is fully out, the seed of the blessed shall be gathered in, in the last days; and he who has not the blood of Abraham flowing in his veins, who has not one particle of the Saviour’s in him, I am afraid is a stereotyped Gentile, who will be left out and not be gathered in the last days; for I tell you it is the chosen of God, the seed of the blessed, that shall be gathered.”
(Apostle Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses 2:82)

They taught that Jesus and the apostles were persecuted and killed for being polygamists.

“The grand reason of the burst of public sentiment in anathemas upon Christ and his disciples, causing his crucifixion, was evidently based upon polygamy, according to the testimony of the philosophers who rose in that age. A belief in the doctrine of a plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus and his followers. We might almost think they were Mormons."
(Prophet Jedediah M. Grant, Journal of Discourses, Vol.1, p.346, August 7, 1853)

 

[PaulDupre]

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

Your early prophets and apostles pretended to know, and their followers believed them. Now your current prophets and apostles don’t know. How do you explain this loss of knowledge - a great apostacy of the Mormon church perhaps?

 

[StLawrenceFan]

**"Many today are under the false impression that Mormonism is merely another Christian denomination, when in actuality, Mormon beliefs are not only unbiblical, but anti-Christian. Below are the highlights of what Mormons believe concerning their source of authority, the Trinity, God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, sin, salvation, and heaven and hell: **

1. Source of Authority. Mormonism teaches that the canon of Scripture was not closed when the Bible was completed. They have three sources in addition to the Bible, all of which they believe contain God’s revelations – the Book of Mormon 2 (changed in more than 4,000 places since 1830), Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. However, Mormons follow the teachings of these three books even when they contradict the Bible. For example, Mormonism teaches that the Bible is the Word of God “as far as it is translated correctly.” Then whenever a Mormon belief contradicts Scripture, the Mormons say that particular part of Scripture is translated incorrectly, and that the correct translation is in one of the Mormon scriptures (The Maze of Mormonism, p. 131). Thereby, the Bible is rejected as the infallible Word of God. [e.g. “The Bible is considered usable, but suspect due to its many errors and missing parts” (Articles of Faith No. 8, Ensign, January 1989, pp. 25, 27).

**2. Trinity. Mormonism teaches polytheism (versus monotheism taught in the Bible), believing that the universe is inhabited by many gods who produce spirit children. Joseph Smith declared, “I will preach on the plurality of Gods. I have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a Spirit: and these three constitute three distinct personages and three Gods” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 370). Mormon Apostle Bruce R. McConkie spoke about the Godhead in this way, “Plurality of Gods: Three separate personages: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, comprise the Godhead. As each of these persons is a God, it is evident, from this standpoint alone, that a plurality of Gods exists. To us, speaking in the proper finite sense, these three are the only Gods we worship. But in addition there is an infinite number of holy personages, drawn from worlds without number, who have passed on to exaltation and are thus gods” (Mormon Doctrine, pp. 576-577). …"

THE REST OF THE QUOTES ARE HERE…(IF YOU CAN READ WHEN YOU ARE LAUGHING…)

 

[why_me]

They taught that Jesus and the apostles were persecuted and killed for being polygamists.

I can match your pasting with my pasting: en.fairmormon.org/Was_Jesus_Christ_married/Was_Jesus_a_polygamist

Early LDS views

Jedediah M. Grant said:

This ancient philosopher says they were both John’s wives. Paul says, “Mine answer to them that do examine me is this:—.Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas.” He, according to Celsus, had a numerous train of wives.
The grand reason of the burst of public sentiment in anathemas upon Christ and his disciples, causing his crucifixion, was evidently based upon polygamy, according to the testimony of the philosophers who rose in that age. A belief in the doctrine of a plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus and his followers. We might almost think they were “Mormons.”
But if you pass on in their history to seek for uniformity and beauty, you will find some grand flare-ups among them. Look, for instance, at Paul and Peter, disputing and quarrelling with each other…
Grant believed that early writers, hostile to the Christians, charged members and even Jesus, with polygamy (a charge which would have offended sophisticated Roman opinion in the day). Grant sees the obvious parallels with how the Saints have been treated over the same issue, but Jesus’ marital state is not his main point, but conflict and persecution. (It is not clear, however, to which source Grant is referring—FAIR has been unable to locate any such reference to Celsus.)

Orson Hyde
Likewise, Orson Hyde remarked:

I discover that some of the Eastern papers represent me as a great blasphemer, because I said, in my lecture on Marriage, at our last Conference, that Jesus Christ was married at Cana of Galilee, that Mary, Martha, and others were his wives, and that he begat children.
All that I have to say in reply to that charge is this—they worship a Savior that is too pure and holy to fulfil the commands of his Father. I worship one that is just pure and holy enough “to fulfil all righteousness;” not only the righteous law of baptism, but the still more righteous and important law “to multiply and replenish the earth.” Startle not at this! for even the Father himself honored that law by coming down to Mary, without a natural body, and begetting a son; and if Jesus begat children, he only “did that which he had seen his Father do.”
Hyde is again not focused on Jesus’ matrimonial state, and notes that being married and begetting children—polygamously or otherwise—is no evil, but is in accordance with God’s commandments from time to time. We remark too that Hyde indicates his uncertainty: “if Jesus begat children,” he is only following the pattern of God the Father, who also had a Son.

Main article: Jesus Christ’s conception
Orson Pratt:

In his defense of plural marriage, Orson Pratt wrote:

From the passage in the forty-fifth Psalm, it will be seen that the great Messiah who was the founder of the Christian religion, was a Polygamist, as well as the Patriarch Jacob and the prophet David from whom He descended according to the flesh. Paul says concerning Jesus, “Verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.” (Heb. 2: 16.) Abraham the Polygamist, being a friend of God, the Messiah chose to take upon himself his seed; and by marrying many honorable wives himself, show to all future generations that he approbated the plurality of Wives under the Christian dispensation, as well as under the dispensations in which His Polygamist ancestors lived.
We have now clearly shown that God the Father had a plurality of wives, one or more being in eternity, by whom He begat our spirits as well as the spirit of Jesus His First Born, and another being upon the earth by whom He begat the tabernacle of Jesus, as His Only Begotten in this world. We have also proved most clearly that the Son followed the example of his Father, and became the great Bridegroom to whom kings’ daughters and many honorable Wives were to be married. We have also proved that both God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ inherit their wives in eternity as well as in time; and that God the Father has already begotten many thousand millions of sons and daughters and sent them into this world to take tabernacles; and that God the Son has the promise that “of the increase of his government there shall be no end;” it being expressly declared that the children of one of His Queens should be made Princes in all the earth. (See Psalm 45: 16.)
Jesus says there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out." (Luke 13: 28.) There are many in this generation so pious that they would consider themselves greatly disgraced to be obliged to associate with a man having a plurality of wives; would it not be well for such to desire a place separate from the kingdom of God, that they may not be contaminated with the society of these old Polygamists? And then it would be so shocking to the modesty of the very pious ladies of Christendom to see Abraham and his wives, Jacob and his wives, Jesus and his honorable wives, all eating occasionally at the same table, and visiting one another, and conversing about their numerous children and their kingdoms. Oh, ye delicate ladies of Christendom, how can you endure such a scene as this? Oh, what will you do, when you behold on the very gates of the holy Jerusalem the names of the Twelve sons of the four wives of the Polygamist Jacob? If you do not want your morals corrupted, and your delicate ears shocked, and your pious modesty put to the blush by the society of polygamists and their wives, do not venture near the holy Jerusalem, nor come near the New Earth; for Polygamists will be honored there, and will be among the chief rulers in that Kingdom.
Pratt likewise argues that Old Testament figures were polygamists, and that Christ and the Father were likewise. This section is preceded by several paragraphs in which Pratt argues that the parables of Christ being “married” to the Church, and that references to him as the “bridegroom” ought to be seen literally. Most modern members—like, doubtless, much of Pratt’s nineteenth century audience—would find this line of argument strained and unpersuasive.

Some elements of Pratt’s publication were disavowed by the First Presidency of the day (see: here). While The Seer contains much of value, and may well reflect how many nineteenth-century saints saw these matters, it cannot be considered an authoritative exposition of LDS doctrine. Pratt’s speculations and arguments are certainly not binding on Church members.

 

[ThurifAcolyte]

why me, can you please also note your sources as well? thanks.

 

[why_me]

why me, can you please also note your sources as well? thanks.

I just did in the above post. I have been trying to edited the source in!

Here are some more sources:

fairlds.org/apol/ai224.html

en.fairmormon.org/Was_Jesus_Christ_married

But we need to remember that FAIR is not sponsored by the LDS church by rather is made of members who defend the lds church against antimormons and critics.

 

[StLawrenceFan]

Your early prophets and apostles pretended to know, and their followers believed them. Now your current prophets and apostles don’t know. How do you explain this loss of knowledge - a great apostacy of the Mormon church perhaps?

:thumbsup:

 

[why_me]

Your early prophets and apostles pretended to know, and their followers believed them. Now your current prophets and apostles don’t know. How do you explain this loss of knowledge - a great apostacy of the Mormon church perhaps?

Umm…I wonder if I searched hard enough if I would find some quotations from former Popes who claimed to know but did not know but their followers believed them…nah…I won’t do it even though I know that I would be successful.

By the way, the Journal of Discourses of past leaders were published by the lds church. No hiding history there.

 

[dianaiad]

The Catholic Church also believes in the common priesthood of all the faithful. All baptized Christians share in the one priesthood of Christ.

…OK,

then I guess that you can go ahead and marry the next couple to walk up to you with a marriage license from the state?

Or…you can perform a mass in your home, for your family, rather than haul them to the nearest Catholic church?

Or…you can listen to a confession and offer absolution?

 

[dianaiad]

Here are some statements from early Mormon prophets and apostles teaching that Jesus was married and had children:

They taught that Jesus and the apostles were persecuted and killed for being polygamists.

Why is it that only the antis consider the Journal of Discourses to be scripure?

don’t you think that you should put as much faith in them as we do…and NO MORE THAN THAT?

Or do you want us to start insisting that everything that any Pope has ever said is scripture to you, and you must, therefore, abide by it?

Be careful about how quickly you answer that one…

 

[Murdock]

bluelake

To answer your two questions: (1) Do I believe that Jesus was the Son of God. Yes, because I am a Mormon, I believe that Jesus was the Son of God. (2) Do I have a King James Version of the Bible and what does the “Mormon Bible” say about Luke 1:26-38? I do have a KJV of the Bible because that is the version my Church uses. There is no “Mormon Bible” because, as I just said, my Church uses the KJV. Lastly, my Church teaches the same things about Luke 1:26-38 as the Catholic and Protestant Churches. In the Journal of Discourses, from the 19th Century, Brigham Young does does speculate about God having sex with Mary. However, that is not a teaching of my Church, few Mormons believe that, and nearly all find it offensive.

My point about being a lawyer is that I have learned that, so often, what people are arguing about is simply a matter of defintion. Definitions are not unimportant, because people want to say what they mean, and generally people are free to define words as they choose, but the defintions often are arrived at in order to pursue some existing objective. Of course, I am talking about the definition of “Christian.”

I will give you my own definition. In referring to religions, I define “Christian” as “a religion founded on Jesus of Nazareth.” In referring to indidividuals, I define a “Christian” as “a follower of Jesus Christ.” Under those definitions, Mormons are most certainly Christians.

It is correct that Mormons have beliefs that are different than those of Protestants and Catholics. Of course, Catholics and Protestants have differing beliefs as well—belief in the Miracle of Transubstantion strikes me as an immensely important such difference. So, the question becomes, will some people use differences in belief to define as “non-Christian” certain religions which are founded on Jesus and certain people who are followers of Christ? This raises the question of exactly what beliefs certain people choose to exclude a religion or person from the defintion of “Christian”?

Some people have used differences in belief to define “Christian” so as to exclude Mormons. Mormons’ lack of belief in the mystery of the Trinity is one such difference. However, the Trinity is not mentioned in the New Testament. The Trinity did not become “Christian” doctrine until A.D. 325. Some people have used Mormons’ belief in an open canon, in which there can be new scriptures in addition to the Bible, to exclude Mormons. Yet, is was not for many centuries after the life of Christ that the contents of the Bible were fixed (and there are still some differences among churches). If these differences in belief exclude Mormons from the definition of “Christian”, then, I must ask, were the people who followed Christ for centuries before the the establishment of the Trinity and before the now-almost-standard compilation of the Bible actually NOT Christians?

Murdock

 

[why_me]

Why is it that only the antis consider the Journal of Discourses to be scripure?

don’t you think that you should put as much faith in them as we do…and NO MORE THAN THAT?

Or do you want us to start insisting that everything that any Pope has ever said is scripture to you, and you must, therefore, abide by it?

Be careful about how quickly you answer that one…

That was my point also. It is quite amazing the double standard that is applied. What the catholics don’t realize is that the lds on this forum can make their lives very uncomfortable if they would dig up dirt. But the mormons are generally too polite to do so.

 

[StLawrenceFan]

bluelake
To answer your two questions: (1) Do I believe that Jesus was the Son of God. Yes, because I am a Mormon, I believe that Jesus was the Son of God.

—Ooops. Except that Jesus IS God. Just a minor fact that the Smithians are a tad off the mark on.

Brigham Young does does speculate about God having sex with Mary. However, that is not a teaching of my Church, few Mormons believe that, and nearly all find it offensive.

–Good to hear you say that, except many mormons believe what the false-prophet Bringham said about that…and much more.
**What do you think about these Brigham quotes? : **

Brigham Young said your own blood must atone for some sins.
"There is not a man or woman, who violates the covenants made with their God, that will not be required to pay the debt. The blood of Christ will never wipe that out, your own blood must atone for it . . . " (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, p. 247; see also, vol. 4, p. 53-54, 219-220).

Brigham Young said you must confess Joseph Smith as a prophet of God in order to be saved.
“…and he that confesseth not that Jesus has come in the flesh and sent Joseph Smith with the fullness of the Gospel to this generation, is not of God, but is Antichrist,” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 9, p. 312).

Brigham Young said his discourses are as good as Scripture.
"I say now, when they [his discourses] are copied and approved by me they are as good Scripture as is couched in this Bible . . . " (Journal of Discourses, vol. 13, p. 264; see also p. 95).

Brigham Young compared his sermons with scripture.
“I know just as well what to teach this people and just what to say to them and what to do in order to bring them into the celestial kingdom…I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve. The people have the oracles of God continually.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 13, p. 95).

Brigham Young said you are damned if you deny polygamy.
“Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned,” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, p. 266). Also, “The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy,” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, p. 269).

Brigham Young said you can’t get to the highest heaven without Joseph Smith’s consent.
“…no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith,” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 289).

Brigham Young said God was progressing in knowledge.
“God himself is increasing and progressing in knowledge, power, and dominion, and will do so, worlds without end,” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p. 120).

Brigham Young said Jesus’ birth was as natural as ours.
“The birth of the Savior was as natural as the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood–was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, p. 115).

Brigham Young said that Jesus was not begotten by the Holy Spirit.
“I have given you a few leading items upon this subject, but a great deal more remains to be told. Now, remember from this time forth, and for ever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, p. 51).

Brigham Young taught that Adam was God.
“Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days! about whom holy men have written and spoken – He is our Father, and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians or non professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, p. 50).

Brigham Young comments about blacks
“You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind…Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 290).
“In our first settlement in Missouri, it was said by our enemies that we intended to tamper with the slaves, not that we had any idea of the kind, for such a thing never entered our minds. We knew that the children of Ham were to be the “servant of servants,” and no power under heaven could hinder it, so long as the Lord would permit them to welter under the curse and those were known to be our religious views concerning them.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 172).
“Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 10, p. 110).

It is correct that Mormons have beliefs that are different than those of Protestants and Catholics. Of course, Catholics and Protestants have differing beliefs as well—belief in the Miracle of Transubstantion strikes me as an immensely important such difference. So, the question becomes, will some people use differences in belief to define as “non-Christian” certain religions which are founded on Jesus and certain people who are followers of Christ? This raises the question of exactly what beliefs certain people choose to exclude a religion or person from the defintion of “Christian”?

You are only scratching the surface on a religion that a false prophet named Joe Smith contrived approx 1,820 years after Jesus (God) founded his Christian Church.
Doesn’t that bother you at all?

Some people have used differences in belief to define “Christian” so as to exclude Mormons. Mormons’ lack of belief in the mystery of the Trinity is one such difference. However, the Trinity is not mentioned in the New Testament. The Trinity did not become “Christian” doctrine until A.D. 325.
Murdock

–The words “Trinity” and “incarnation” and even the term “Bible” are not mentioned in the Bible, but these realities are indeed, of course, revealed in the Bible.

 

[Murdock]

StLawrenceFan

1. Why do you care anyway? Specifically, why do you care whether Mormons are Christians?
2. You are Catholic, so what difference does it make to you if Mormons consider themselves to be Christians?
3. Also, it appears that you started this thread for the purpose of persuading others that Mormons are not Christians. (Other than by Mormons themselves, I have seen few posts in this forum that disagree with you, so you appear to be “preaching to the already converted.”) Of course, starting this thread was perfectly OK. But why? What difference does it make to you if others consider Mormons to be Christians?

BTW; Where did your handle"StLawrenceFan" come from? Is it sports related?

Murdock