Posted on 01/06/2008 2:38:52 AM PST by restornu
I appreciate Orson Scott Card’s response to my first entry, and his rather lengthy essay can serve to move the discussion along.
The first matter of concern is to clarify the question. When I asked, “Are Mormons ‘Christians’ as defined by traditional Christian orthodoxy?,” I was stating the question exactly as it was put to me. The words “as defined by traditional Christian orthodoxy” were part of my assignment, not my imposition.
At the same time, I was glad the question was asked in this manner, for it is the only way I can provide an answer that matters. The question could surely be asked in other ways and we could attempt to define Christianity in terms of sociology, phenomenology, the history of religions, or any number of other disciplines. In any of these cases, someone with specific training in these fields should provide the argument.
The question could simply refer to common opinion – do people on the street believe that Mormonism is Christianity? But then the matter would be in better hands among the pollsters.
In any event, the question was framed theologically, and it was framed by Beliefnet in terms of “traditional Christian orthodoxy.” With the question structured that way, the answer is clear and unassailable – Mormonism is not Christianity. When the question is framed this way, Mr. Card and I actually agree, as his essay makes clear.
In his words, “I am also happy to agree with him that when one compares our understanding of the nature of God and Christ, we categorically disagree with almost every statement in the “historic creeds and doctrinal affirmations” he refers to.”
Mr. Card would prefer that the question be put differently. I understand his concern, and if I were a Mormon I would share that concern and would try to define Christianity in some way other than traditional Christian orthodoxy. The reason is simple – traditional Christian orthodoxy and Mormon theology are utterly incompatible.
Mr. Card is gracious, even when suggesting that I misinterpret the Book of Mormon. He even suggests that I have not read it. The fact is that I have, and I have even studied Mormon theology in the course of my graduate studies. Reading the Book of Mormon was a fascinating experience. Nevertheless, if I were a Mormon arguing that Mormonism is Christianity, I would be very reluctant to suggest that those I am seeking to persuade should read the Book of Mormon. Nothing will more quickly reveal the distance between Mormon theology and historic Christianity.
Mormonism uses the language of Christian theology and makes many references to Christ. Mr. Card wants to define Christianity in a most minimal way, theologically speaking. If I were arguing the other side of this question, I would attempt the same. But Christianity has never been defined in terms of merely thinking well of Jesus. Mormonism claims to affirm the New Testament teachings about Jesus, but actually presents a very different Jesus from the onset. A reading of Mormonism’s authoritative documents makes this clear.
All these things point back to the reason the question is so important in our contemporary context. Mormons want their religion to be seen as another form of Christianity. In other words, they want to identify with what from their inception they sought to deny. There are advantages to Mormonism on this score, but this surely places them in an awkward position.
“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints,” as Mormonism is officially known, claims to be the only true church. As stated in the Doctrine and Covenants [1:30], Mormonism is “the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth.” According to Mormon teaching, the church was corrupted after the death of the apostles and became the “Church of the Devil.” Mormonism then claims that the true church was restored through the Prophet Joseph Smith in the 1820s. This restored church was, Mormon theology claims, given the keys to the kingdom and the authority of the only true priesthood.
Why would Mormonism now want to be identified as a form of Christianity, when its central historical claim is that the churches commonly understood to be Christian are part of the Church of the Devil?
There is simply no way around the Mormon claim that the other churches hold to a corrupted theology and have no true priesthood – and are not true churches. Mr. Card may complain that traditional Christianity defines the faith in a way that rejects Mormonism. Fair enough. But Mormonism rejects historic Christianity as it makes it own central claim – to be the only true church, restored on earth in the latter days.
Mr. Card’s statements on baptism make this point clear enough, as does this statement from his essay: “In other words, at the level of religious practice we believe that we are the only Christians who act and speak with the authority of Christ today.” I sincerely appreciate Mr. Card’s straightforward statement of this fact.
I was genuinely troubled, but hardly surprised, when Mr. Card recalled his experience at the Templeton event. It is indeed a scandal that so many Christian churches and denominations allow priests, theologians, and bishops to deny the faith and still call themselves Christians – and even to remain in good standing in these churches. If these deny the faith and persist in their error, they are not Christians. Of course, the only way we know this is because we do have an objective standard by which to judge what is and is not Christianity, and that is the very “traditional Christian orthodoxy” that Mr. Card and Mormonism reject.
Finally, Mr. Card brings up the question of Gov. Mitt Romney’s candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008. He states, “But let’s remember now why we are having this discussion. It’s because Mitt Romney is running for President of the United States, and Mitt Romney is a Mormon.”
Mr. Card also claims that I have “gone on record elsewhere as advising evangelical Christians not to vote for Mitt Romney, even though he’s the candidate whose life practices and whose professed beliefs are the closest to fitting the political agenda of many or perhaps most evangelicals.” That is not true. I did not advise evangelicals not to vote for Mitt Romney. I have argued that evangelicals should think carefully about this question and I have raised concerns about a Mormon in the White House.
Others will bring their own concerns. I am not interested in worries about Mormon temple undergarments and plural marriage. I do not worry about a Mormon president playing into apocalyptic scenarios with nuclear weapons. I am concerned that a Mormon in the White House would do much to serve the worldwide missionary cause of Mormonism. I do not worry that a President Romney would push that agenda from the White House. My concern is more about symbolism and perception. My concern is that of a Christian who does not believe that Mormonism is Christianity.
In other words, my concern is about as politically incorrect as one can get in these strange times. I believe that Mormonism does not teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and I believe that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only Gospel that saves.
I am thankful that the U.S Constitution excludes any religious test for public office, but this excludes any government test, and is not a constraint upon any private citizen’s electoral decision. I will fight for Gov. Romney’s right to be on the ballot and to serve if elected.
There are very many reasons to admire and appreciate Gov. Romney – starting right where Mr. Card points, with the Romney family. I, along with millions of fellow evangelicals, do admire the Romney family and respect his family commitments. The fact that so many other candidates fall short of his commitment is a sad commentary on the age – and on those candidates.
As I have argued over and over again, electoral decisions are contextual decisions. Will evangelicals vote for Mitt Romney? Time will tell, and the context will largely determine that decision. I will be glad to argue this further, but that is not the assigned question.
So, Mr. Card I thank you for your thoughtful and gracious response and I look forward to our continuing exchange.
The only thing I see that Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr. has fear of the unknown as far as Missionary progress.
But fear is not of the Lord...
John 14: 27
27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.
Mormonism may not be Christianity (in my mind as well), but I’m also of the opinion that God can let anybody he chooses into Heaven, and my opinions will just be that - my own opinions.
And while most of the Mormons that I’ve met whom I’ve liked were not particularly good Mormons, I have met a fair number of good Mormons who make better people and more consistently follow the spirit of Christianity if not the fundamental tenets than most who claim to be “good” Christians.
So, I’m inclined to think that we are all on this world together, muddling our way through our lives, and if we spend too much time trying to divine how God will choose between one good person and the next good person, rather than combatting real evil, then I think we’ll have failed. Mormonism as a religion may have its flaws, but generally I think it advances many of the same spiritual goals that Christianity does, and as a result, Mormonism, even if they aren’t Christians (again in my opinion), they are our natural allies in a world where things could be a lot worse than having a Mormon in the White House.
That said, I’m not a big fan of Romney. In fact, I don’t like him for reasons other than his chosen religion.
Main Entry: 2fear Function: noun Etymology: Middle English fer, from Old English fǣr sudden danger; akin to Old High German fāra ambush and perhaps to Latin periculum attempt, peril, Greek peiran to attempt Date: 12th century 1 a: an unpleasant often strong emotion caused by anticipation or awareness of danger b (1): an instance of this emotion (2): a state marked by this emotion2: anxious concern : solicitude3: profound reverence and awe especially toward God4: reason for alarm : danger
Sorry I still think that kind of concern translates into oh what will we do if that should happens!
A majority of Christians will not vote for a Mormon essentially because a Mormon President would be used to draw people into their deception. So this reason alone is sufficient to fight politically to stop the Romney candidacy.
When you come right down to it, it is about souls and eternal destination.
How people can easily see Mormons as Christian is understandable. They use the King James Version of the Bible, proclaim about how Jesus is the “savior” of mankind and much more. Its when you get further into their doctrines that you discover, from a purely Christian perspective, that the Mormons are either absolutely right in that they have been chosen for new revelation...or horribly wrong and in danger of the curses found in the last chapter of Revelation.
I can not honestly say that it is Christian. If it is then the “completeness” of what Christ did on the cross is a lie and it was not complete at all. If it is I will need many more wives. If it is, I will one day be a god of my own planet of unsaved beings. If it is I have to accept Satan as Jesus’ wayward brother. If it is the Bible is incomplete and the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price and Doctrine of Covenants are all on top of Gods word as more of Gods word but only through Joseph Smith. You kn...that guy who was killed in a gun battle with the government over his murder charges and his extra wives.
Yes, I know, it sounds very “judgmental” of me to enter the conversation this way and come off as knowing the truth while the others are “lost.” Well, I have always said this...faiths are NOT equal. That kind of utter crap is for spineless liberals who want all of us to believe that ALL religion “gets you to God” when it does not. Why the heck should I take any time to act in a Godly manner and follow His example as lived out for us if all I have to do is make my own religion to do whatever I please and still “get there” according to liberals? Their’s is a situational ethic and world-view that permeates EVERYTHING they do in life justifying all their contemptible actions along with good ones. No absolutes and no judgment. It brings us nothing but a culture of disobedience and ugliness that seems to have no cure because God is not allowed in to cure it.
I will never yield to such crap. So, No, I do not see the Mormons as Christians but as a cult of misled people who have believed a lie.
I must say - you are quite right.
You wrote a good thoughtful post. Thanks.
Gee, and good Mormons will one day get to be gods of their own planets.
Don't these sound familiar. I guess there is just nothing new under the sun.
The good doctor says what most Christians believe who have thought through the implications of a Mormon president. Souls, souls, souls and furthermore souls. For all I know Mitt Romney might become a great conservative president but my friends this is not the most important thing. Where you are going to spend eternity is the most important election. How you vote about your own life will decide whether it is heaven or hell. Traditional Christianity is the true Christianity and Mormonism is not Christianity.
A majority of Christians will not vote for a Mormon essentially because a Mormon President would be used to draw people into their deception. So this reason alone is sufficient to fight politically to stop the Romney candidacy.
When you come right down to it, it is about souls and eternal destination.
****
2 Ne. 2: 8
8 Wherefore, how great the importance to make these things known unto the inhabitants of the earth, that they may know that there is no flesh that can dwell in the presence of God, save it be through the merits, and mercy, and grace of the Holy Messiah, who layeth down his life according to the flesh, and taketh it again by the power of the Spirit, that he may bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, being the first that should rise.
2 Ne. 10: 24
24 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, reconcile yourselves to the will of God, and not to the will of the devil and the flesh; and remember, after ye are reconciled unto God, that it is only in and through the grace of God that ye are saved.
Can we name our planets anything we want? If we are gods of planets, will people pray to us? Will it be okay to ban fat people in spandex? These are the questions people should be asking.
Also, is the planet gig reserved for beliving mormons, or do you get your own planet even if you only go by the Bible.
By your principles, no one should vote for any candidate who is of another religion, because doing so promotes religious error.
If Mitt Romney is elected, he will have roughly the same number of admirers and haters as G. W. Bush. I haven’t seen any stampede into the Methodist Church on account of the Bush presidency.
I have met a fair number of good Mormons who make better people and more consistently follow the spirit of Christianity if not the fundamental tenets than most who claim to be “good” Christians.
So do you think you earn your way to heaven by being a good person?
Question: Are members of The Church of England Christian? Are members of the Swedish Lutheran Church Christian? The leader of the CofE said recently you didn’t even have to believe in the virgin birth of Jesus to be a good member. The LCofS wants to allow homosexuals church weddings.
Just a question.
I agree with every word of what you say.
2 Ne. 10:
24 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, reconcile yourselves to the will of God, and not to the will of the devil and the flesh; and remember, after ye are reconciled unto God, that it is only in and through the grace of God that ye are saved.
So as long as one stays on the path you know...
Luke 13
23 Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said unto them,
24 ¶ Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.
25 When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are:
26 Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets.
27 But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.
28 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.
29 And they shall come from the east, and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God.
30 And, behold, there are last which shall be first, and there are first which shall be last.
I don't know that creedal Christianity depends on "completeness", as you define it. After all, we believe that He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead.
It seems to me that to believe in the revelation to Joseph Smith you have to believe in the apostasy of the whole Church on earth, which is equivalent to believing that the Gates of Hell did in fact prevail, which is also believing that promises out of the mouth of the Savior are not reliable.
I can't cross that bridge.
That would be awesome!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.