Mormonism

[LivingWaters7]

Living Waters ,

Just curious what is the Mormon view on salvation and what about confession of sins?

Sure. Latter-day Saints typically speak of “salvation” and “eternal life” separately, and eternal life is also know as “exaltation”. By “salvation”, we typically mean being saved from physical death. Latter-day Saints believe that through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ, all are saved from physical death (i.e., all will be resurrected). However, our Father in Heaven desires more than that for us. He desires that we return to His presence, live with Him for eternity, and become like Him, sharing in His life as joint-heirs with Christ. This belief is sometimes known as deification or theosis (becoming ‘gods’). While certain traditional Christian groups have that belief, our belief (which we call exaltation/eternal life) is different in a few senses.

To receive the gift of eternal life, Latter-day Saints believe that one must first have faith in Jesus Christ, repent of their sins, be baptized by proper priesthood authority (because LDS believe that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the “one true Church”, we believe that only it has the priesthood of God, and therefore the power and authority to baptize and perform other sacred ordinances), receive the Holy Ghost, and endure to the end. Other sacred ordinances that we believe are essential to receiving eternal life are receiving the holy priesthood of God (for males), being endowed with power from on high (aka the “endowment”), and being eternally married to one’s spouse (we believe that neither the man is without the woman, nor the woman without the man in the Lord). The last two sacred ordinances are performed in temples, which we believe are houses of the Lord (I went today and I love going there). So, we believe that if one has faith in Christ, they will follow His commandments (and of course we believe that some of these commandments the Lord has given in these latter-days through continuing revelation), and receive eternal life.

On confession of sins, Latter-day Saints believe that one must always repent. In general, we can confess our sins directly to God, however certain serious sins should be confessed to one’s local leader, known as a bishop, who can help that person in the repentance process. Because we consider our ordinances (what some call “sacraments”) to be sacred, and include covenants that we enter into with God, reflection and repentance should always be done before participating, so that we do not participate unworthily.

Hope that helps.

 

[Anniejoe]

Latter-day Saints believe that one must first have faith in Jesus Christ

Does this mean merely having faith he existed? Or does it mean believing that he is who he said he is? One can believe in Jesus without taking him at his word and believing what he taught about himself. In what sense do LDS “have faith” in Jesus?

 

[TexanKnight]

Latter-day Saints believe that one must first have faith in Jesus Christ

Does this mean merely having faith he existed? Or does it mean believing that he is who he said he is? One can believe in Jesus without taking him at his word and believing what he taught about himself. In what sense do LDS “have faith” in Jesus?

The danger of Mormonism is that they use the same names and words we do, but with different meanings.

For example, we say God. We mean the One True God. The ONLY God. For them, god was once a sinful man and is one of many gods. They even had a prophet who taught Adam was our god.

When we say Jesus. We mean part of the Trinity. The Son. Conceived by the Holy Spirit.

When they say Jesus, they mean not part of the Trinity. And he was conceived when God had relations with Mary.

Same words and names, but different meanings

 

[RebeccaJ]

I believe that there are many things and I do believe in our religion, but I was wondering what you all thought of the Mormon religion. Any (name removed by moderator)ut would be greatly appreciated.

It is what it is, but it isn’t truth.

 

[LivingWaters7]

I believe that I am a Christian, just not a traditional or Nicene one if you will.

LivingWaters7,

I understand that is your belief, or you say it is, at least. But words mean things, even in this strange modern world. A Christian is one who believes that God chose to incarnate Himself in the man Jesus, the Second Person of the Trinity. The One God in Three Persons affirmed by the Nicene Creed is the God of Christians.

Latter-day Saints believe that the Second Person of the Godhead (what we call the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost together) did incarnate in the man Jesus Christ. As far as the Nicene Creed, the definitions provided by the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed were of course not held to by many if not most of the early Christians, hence the need for the councils (and also interestingly, Arians, who are not Trinitarian, were not re-baptized, from my understanding, hence they apparently had valid Christian baptisms, from that point of view).

That’s what “Christian” means: you accept this belief of God as He revealed Himself in His Scriptures.

Latter-day Saints accept the belief of God as He revealed Himself in His Scriptures.

If you worship a different definition of deity, that’s up to you. But Christians, by definition, are Trinitarians. Non-trinitarians, are by definition, not Christians. You can appropriate the term, but that doesn’t make it so.

See above.

I’ve always thought that most Mormons make lovely neighbors and co-workers. They are not Christians, which is sad for them. We all need to pray for all sincere seekers who groping their way to the true God.

I think we should always pray for each other, thank you.

 

[Anniejoe]

As far as the Nicene Creed, the definitions provided by the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed were of course not held to by many if not most of the early Christians,

Indeed? What is your source for this piece of information?

 

[LivingWaters7]

Latter-day Saints believe that one must first have faith in Jesus Christ

Does this mean merely having faith he existed? Or does it mean believing that he is who he said he is? One can believe in Jesus without taking him at his word and believing what he taught about himself. In what sense do LDS “have faith” in Jesus?

No, it doesn’t mean that we just believe that He existed. It means that we accept who He said He was, that He is our divine Lord and Savior, and knowing that He died for our sins, and that through His atonement, we can be forgiven of our sins and receive eternal life. Having faith in Christ means that we follow His commandments and become His disciples.

 

[batman1973]

A false religion founded by a man, who as a boy who was deceived by and angel of light. He invented the perfect way to get what ever he wanted. Money, power, women, Joe had it all. Unfortunaly, his phony faith didnt die with him, because he had a person just a sick as he was (Brigham Young) take over. All we can do is pray for these lost souls, and hope that they will come to the truth.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Words are important, and Mormons use words that sound Christian but have been given a different definition. Jesus Christ is God, who incarnated as Man. This does not compare to LDS belief of a Jesus, at all. Using the same word, incarnate, does not make Mormonsim a Christian religion. It is a parallel construct, similar to Arianism in nature, and belief in regards to the divine nature of Jesus Christ. Gnostic similarities as well with beliefs of secret knowledge and that knowledge having salvic properties.

LDS will couch their beliefs to non-Mormons in Christian terms, without going into details, especially around non-Mormons who have shown up for their Sunday services.

Don’t be deceived. Their only interest is to replace Christianty.

 

[Anniejoe]

Words are important, and Mormons use words that sound Christian but have been given a different definition. Jesus Christ is God, who incarnated as Man. This does not compare to LDS belief of a Jesus, at all. Using the same word, incarnate, does not make Mormonsim a Christian religion. It is a parallel construct, similar to Arianism in nature, and belief in regards to the divine nature of Jesus Christ. Gnostic similarities as well with beliefs of secret knowledge and that knowledge having saving properties.

Exactly right, RebeccaJ. I grew up with a father raised in a similar Arian-revivial cult, the JWs. There are great similarities in the two sects. I’m used to the double-speak that is designed to sound “Christian” when it is really just the same old heresy dressed up to deceive the unwary. Most of these folks are deeply deluded and need our prayers that God will lead them to the truth.

 

[triumphguy]

My login name means Always Faithful, in Latin. As in Always Faithful to the Catholic Church. It’s a military term, one that the Marines use, but I thought it would be a cool user-name for a Catholic forum.

Yes I know! I was kinda hinting at something…

 

[LivingWaters7]

As far as the Nicene Creed, the definitions provided by the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed were of course not held to by many if not most of the early Christians,

Indeed? What is your source for this piece of information?

JND Kelly’s Early Christian Doctrines is one historical treatise that demonstrates the landscape found in ancient ante-Nicene Christianity, where Nicene-Constantinopolitan definitions on God (i.e. homoousios, a word that Arians actually used, which was then redefined by the Nicene Christians, an interesting thing in light of some of the comments in this thread) were not found. Indeed, Early Christians that were Arians were not re-baptized, which seems to indicate that they had valid Christian baptism despite being non-Trinitarians.

 

[triumphguy]

I didn’t think that Mormons believe that Jesus died for our sins. They even find the cross to be offensive.

 

[Anniejoe]

JND Kelly’s Early Christian Doctrines is one historical treatise that demonstrates the landscape found in ancient ante-Nicene Christianity,

The mere fact that an Anglican writer has noted there were “anti-Nicene” parties in existence does not support your comment that most Christians held that view. We all know there was an Arian heresy. The fact that some people believed it doesn’t make it any more true. It was a heresy then, and it’s a heresy now. Only by claiming that the Gospel of John included forged verses can JWs and LDS explain away the Scriptural proof for the Trinity.

 

[LivingWaters7]

I didn’t think that Mormons believe that Jesus died for our sins. They even find the cross to be offensive.

Latter-day Saints firmly believe that Jesus Christ suffered and died for our sins. While we do not use the cross as a religious symbol, we firmly believe that Christ died on the cross at Calvary, and was resurrected on the third day. It is only through His atoning sacrifice that we believe we can be cleansed of our sins and receive eternal life.

 

[TexanKnight]

JND Kelly’s Early Christian Doctrines is one historical treatise that demonstrates the landscape found in ancient ante-Nicene Christianity, where Nicene-Constantinopolitan definitions on God (i.e. homoousios, a word that Arians actually used, which was then redefined by the Nicene Christians, an interesting thing in light of some of the comments in this thread) were not found. Indeed, Early Christians that were Arians were not re-baptized, which seems to indicate that they had valid Christian baptism despite being non-Trinitarians.

To clarify. The concept of Trinity was always taught. When heresies came about, a Council was needed to clarify the truth.

 

[triumphguy]

Latter-day Saints firmly believe that Jesus Christ suffered and died for our sins. While we do not use the cross as a religious symbol, we firmly believe that Christ died on the cross at Calvary, and was resurrected on the third day. It is only through His atoning sacrifice that we believe we can be cleansed of our sins and receive eternal life.

Let’s break that down.

Do you believe that Christ died on the cross for our sins? Not suffered and died, but specifically died on the cross for our sins. Not suffered in Gethsemane for our sins, but through his death on the cross saved us from our sins?

AND do you believe that His death was sufficient in and of itself?

 

[Anniejoe]

To clarify. The concept of Trinity was always taught. When heresies came about, a Council was needed to clarify the truth.

Well-stated, TexasKnight.

 

[LivingWaters7]

JND Kelly’s Early Christian Doctrines is one historical treatise that demonstrates the landscape found in ancient ante-Nicene Christianity,

The mere fact that an Anglican writer has noted there were “anti-Nicene” parties in existence does not support your comment that most Christians held that view.

No, I did not state that Kelly (the fact that he is Anglican isn’t really relevant to his academic credentials and work, in my opinion) noted that there were “anti-Nicene” parties in existence. I was referring to the “ante-Nicene” landscape, i.e. pre-Nicene.

We all know there was an Arian heresy. The fact that some people believed it doesn’t make it any more true. It was a heresy then, and it’s a heresy now.

I don’t believe I ever claimed that the Arian beliefs were/are true. I was specifically referencing that Arian baptisms were accepted as valid Christian baptisms, yet they are not Trinitarian. Latter-day Saints are not Arians.

Only by claiming that the Gospel of John included forged verses can JWs and LDS explain away the Scriptural proof for the Trinity.

Are you referring to the Comma Johanneum? If so, that isn’t in the Gospel of John, it’s in the First Epistle of John. Also, the arguments about the authenticity of those verses is of course subject to academic debate. In and of itself, I find no problem with them as a Latter-day Saint, since, while we reject the Trinity doctrine, we do believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one in purpose, will, love, and intent, and are referred to collectively as “Godhead” or “God” in our scriptures and other writings.

 

[LivingWaters7]

To clarify. The concept of Trinity was always taught. When heresies came about, a Council was needed to clarify the truth.

The doctrine of homoousios was not always taught. Indeed, the word had a different meaning and was used by Arians prior to appropriation at the Council of Nicaea (which, as I mentioned, is an interesting occurrence in light of comments on this thread about definitions.