Are Christians Mormon?

Light Planet ^ | Truman G. Madsen

[svcw]

Why thank you Mr. Ophra McDonnell.

[Colofornian]

I believe that the Mormon faith is a form of Christianity...

Guideline #1 in a Primer on Discerment: Repeat, Peter, after me: Mormonism is polytheist...Christianity is monotheist...[Or did you flunk basic elementary math?]

I would go so far as to venture the opinion that the Mormon faith has at least some authenticity...

So you claim that per Joseph Smith - History -- an account of the alleged "first vision" that Mormonism was founded upon (as recorded in their Pearl of Great Price "scriptures")...that...
...two unnamed "personages"...
...popped in and appeared to a pimply faced teen boy...
...told him that ALL the Christian sects were "wrong"...
...told him NOT to join ANY of them...
...told him that ALL "professors" (professing believers) of these Christian sects were "corrupt"...
...and told him that ALL creeds of these Christian sects were an "abomination..."

That kind of "authentic" is of which you attempt to speak?

Or do you just plead "guilty" to exporting such depth of ignorance?

My belief is that Mormons and evangelical Christians each have some of the truth and will find that in the Kingdom...

(Yeah, yeah, yeah, the old elephant analogy where everybody is blindfolded and each is feeling a different portion of the elephant...and only YOU and those like YOU have the blindfold off and your vision is somehow able to 100% accurately scan the scenario...My...how convenient that your vantage point alone becomes so accurate in assessing the scene)

[svcw]

J Smith did not condemn (damn) man, he did condemn (damn) the Word of God and God Himself.
All of mormonISM is blasphemy of the Word of God Almighty.

[delacoert]

Surely, the Mormon faith fills an automatic need in the American cultural psychology, to have a faith that points to the New Jerusalem being on American soil, and to unite the original (native) and the pioneer societies under some kind of Christian banner.

"Surely!?"

You CAN'T be serious.

I know you ARE serious, but all I can think is ... "You CAN'T be serious!"

Only a multigenerational Utah Mormon with a thoroughly constipated view of the American history could disgorge that felgercarb. 

Connecting the dots of Mormon faith, and American cultural psychology by saying the "Mormon faith fills an automatic need" is delusional.  

The persistent Mormon doctrinal twaddle about the New Jerusalem on American soil is arrogant, insular and bigoted. 

The willingness to publicly display such doctrine without realizing that it has the gravitas of a comic book is just amazing.

[CainConservative]

One of the worse cults on the planet attracting good people.

Such a crying shame where they’re headed.

[bushpilot1]

I want an explanation why the Mormon’s lied about the cow being stolen by Indians.

The cow wandered off..

[Vendome]

LOL

Thought you made up a new word “felgercarb”.

Googled it. Very funny and Mormon.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Statements of Christian Denominations on Mormonism:

Christian churches teach belief in God as an eternal, self-existent, immortal being, unfettered by corporeal limitations and unchanging in both character and nature. In recent years, several Christian denominations have made studies of Mormon teaching and come to the conclusion that there are irreconcilable differences between LDS doctrine and Christian beliefs based on the Bible.

• Statement of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
• Statement of the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod
• Statement of the Presbyterian Church (USA)
• Statement of the Roman Catholic Church
• Statement of the Southern Baptist Convention
• Statement of the United Methodist Church
• Statement of the Assemblies of God Church

[Godzilla]

I try to avoid it unless i’m sleepless and need help getting to sleep

[dangus]

>> For while during the first generation Mormonism was thought to be utterly outlandish, we may live to see the generation in which it will be thought to be utterly obvious. <<

If there is any movement towards this day, it is because the Mormon Church has abandoned the practices which made it so properly reviled at its founding, wherein Joseph Smith used the most horrible forms of blasphemy to excuse his promiscuity, including with married women.

[T. P. Pole]

I am holding in my hands the January 2012 Ensign. I think you may need to change your name to Excuse_My_Inaccuracy.

The first article starts on page 4 (table contents before that). The first reverence to God is on page 5 - "Be honest with yourself, with others, and with your Heavenly Father" follow with a story about Cardinal Wolsey from Shakespeare's King Henry the 8th.

Second article on page 6 - Courage to Weather the Storm. The last paragraph there starts "I know that God heard our prayers that night and that He protected us from the worst of the storm."

Third article is single paragraph on page 6 targeting children with a Book of Mormon activity.

Fourth article is on page 7. "Watchcare and Ministering through visiting teaching." In the first paragraph - "For Relief Society sisters, visiting teaching can be charity in action, an important way to exercises our faith in the Savior."

Fifth article is on page 8. "Visiting Teachers led me to Jesus Christ."

Next article is on the Book of Mormon (which is the focus of study for the adult Sunday School class this year). While Joseph Smith is not mentioned directly, without him there is no BoM, so close enough.

The next article is "What Happily Married Couples Do." One of the points is "Be humble and cultivate Christlike attributes."

"Recognizing God's Hand in our daily blessing" on page 17.
"More than just a Sunday Church" on page 24.
"Look up" [to see how Heavenly Father sees us and not sideways to see how others are viewing our lives] on page 26.
"Worship the Lord by Singing Hymns" on page 30.

I only have a paper copy, so I might have missed it, but I haven't seen the name Joseph Smith (or Brigham Young) yet in this month's Ensign. There are several articles on the Book of Mormon, and another on George Albert Smith (the subject of Priesthood and Relief Society lessons this year) (and there it is! Page 55 in the George Albert Smith article - "I would hear him relating the story of the founding of the church by the Prophet Joseph Smith").

So there you have it. One direct reference on page 55 of an 80 page magazine is hardly "pages and pages and pages about Joseph Smith, [and] there’s usually an article about Brigham Young." Likewise "God gets his first mention on page 83" is another false statement.

Yes, every couple of years there is an Ensign that focuses on Joseph Smith. Maybe that's the one you saw. But it has been a while. June of 2011 had a priesthood theme. January 2009 had an article on Joseph Smith with a Smith cover. January 2008 had a Smith cover and article, too. Dec 05 is the last time I see an Ensign with more than one article on Joseph Smith.

Here's a link to the current Ensign if you want a look.

[dangus]

>> When the Boy Prophet emerged from the grove now called Sacred, he announced an unqualified testimony that God is a person. In doing so he offended the traditional sensitivities of every official Christian church. They had used the word “person”—and still do—but only in a most attenuated form, ascribing to the Eternal, consciousness, will, some kind of individuality, but denying the full-bodied characteristics of personality that we associate with the word. <<

It’s rather hard to have a reasonable discussion about Christology with someone who has no idea what “person” means.

First, God is not “a person,”; God is THREE persons. Now, if you think that a person is a man, you’re going to be baffled by that: How can one God be three persons?

“Person” is not merely a gender-neutral word for “man”. Hence, legal corporations are persons: one person which represents numerous people’s common legal interest. You can see why it blew NPR’s mind when the Supreme Court ruled that a corporation was a person; In NPR’s play pretend ignorance, they claim not to know that persons do not enjoy humans’ or citizens’ rights, privileges and responsibilities since a person is not necessarily human or eligible for citizenship.

A person is an outward representation of an entity, whether than entity is a legal construct, a program, a human being, or God. God has three persons. Only one of those persons is a human, Jesus. God, the father, is not a man. Nor is God, the Holy Spirit. There is nothing in the bible to say otherwise. In fact, “Son of Man” is a Hebraism emphasizing that the Messiah was a descendant of Adam. It is used to emphasize Jesus’ human origins. Thus, when Jesus says, “But if you believe not that the Son of Man has the authority to...” what he’s asserting is that God has granted this authority to human flesh.

How can a father not be a man? The theologically ignorant would say that God is metaphorically a father. The truth is that God is father, and that a human father metaphorically that which God is.

We relate to Jesus as a man. We relate to YHWH as a father. And we relate to the Advocate as a spirit. In this way, our experiences of God are tripartate. But God is one being.

[bibletruth]

Are Mormons Christian...

The Bible clearly teaches that NO ONE is a Christian except those who have the faith of Christ and believe in the Grace of God WITHOUT WORKS of their own hands...

Mormon's are HUGE WORKS oriented focused and and DO NOT respect that Christ Jesus DIED for ALL SINS and that we now live in the Grace of God, not of men's works. Christ Jesus is the ONLY mediator between God and men: the Man Christ Jesus. Period.

The Bible and God answer is: NO.

[Peter ODonnell]

Just a few thoughts on this exchange of views.

By the way, I am not Mormon and will probably not convert. I am more interested in the present-day reality of the LDS faith than its origins, as I tried to say earlier.

If as some have told me, the concept of Mormon integrity is “satanic” then can you also explain why (to my view at least) the Mormon people lead essentially good spiritual lives, why they seem to be on the right side of social questions that Satanic influences are obviously working on the other side (e.g., gay marriage), why there is an overall similarity in the culture of evangelical Christians and Mormons? I don’t see much evidence of Satan’s work there. As to blended theology being “satanic” that is a misreading of what I said, which was that in the Kingdom, there would be the opportunity for various current denominations to reach a similar understanding. I mean, how could it be otherwise, unless you accept that only one group is saved and everyone else is excluded? That is the JW approach and I realize it exists in all Christian denominations. That is not my fault. And I don’t believe that, it does not speak of a loving and just God, but an arbitrary and almost random God (a Satanic concept as far as I can see).

I think people might have read too little into my New Jerusalem comments, I stated that the Mormon church cultivated an “automatic” need in American culture to see the New Jerusalem as being on American soil, or at least shall we say directly relevant to American experience. Personally, I think the Mormons will come to view Utah and not Missouri as the actual location, in fact I’m surprised they didn’t reach that conclusion earlier. It is almost self-evident when you go there. Their concept of the Temple Lot in Missouri might be some sort of premature or superceded vision.

The irony is that almost nobody in either group is receptive to the concept of equality before God. Throw in the added complexity of Roman Catholicism and the Orthodox faith, and you’ve clearly got almost no chance of an “understanding” or meeting of the minds. That to me is the Satanic part. I’m not talking about Islam and Buddhism and the Hindu faith here, I’m talking about various basically authentic forms of Christianity that cannot seem to accept each other’s legitimacy. Perhaps one is right and the others are wrong. That’s certainly what Mormons believe and there I disagree with them.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

That was a bit of sarcasm (I figured it would be obvious, guess not), but it sure seems strange to be so obsessed over the person who started the church. The Lutherans don't CONSTANTLY swoon about Martin Luther. And no, I don't need to go read the latest issue of Ensign, you can put that to music.

Attending a university in Utah for 5 years guaranteed that I'll never join that church. For 5 years I heard them talk about "converts" and "transplants" with the same venom that most people talk about felons ("He's nothing, he's just a convert!"). If I join up, that's how they'll talk about me. Why would I want that? In the mormon church, if you're not a 5th generation Utahn, you're nothing and they'll let you know it. Maybe the CEO of the LDS church should have a good talk to the flock about ARROGANCE and being bonkers over appearing wealthy when you're not.

I found it funny that they assumed that if you've never been on a mission, you've never been anywhere. As a military veteran, I've spent more time forward-deployed than most of them have on the can.

[T. P. Pole]

The problem with your sarcasm is that there are weak-minded folks here that take everything negative they hear about mormons and believe it. There are enough differences between mormonism and orthodox Christianity that we don't need to be making stuff up.

For example, every Christmas around here you see claims that mormons don't sing Christmas songs in their church services. No amount of proof seems to satisfy the people who repeatedly make these claims. These type of person would easily believe a claim that the Ensign has article after article on Joseph Smith without any mention of God.

So when I see them (and have the time) I point out the most absurd claims, if only to get it on record that there is an opposing view. Sometimes, like here, I get an admission that the statement was false.

The other problem with your claim of sarcasm is that within the same sentence you expand upon your original point (which you just stated was a intentional false statement). Hard to tell for sure what you are intending here, unless you are intending to imply your original claim was the truth after all. Strange way of presenting your case.

As for your other observations, I suspect that they are spot on in the Utah region of the church. I've never lived in Utah, so I can't speak for sure, but I know many that did grow up there and that attitude would not surprise me. Outside of Utah (at least every place I have lived) converts are cherished, not shunned.

[af_vet_rr]

Mar 13:21 And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here [is] Christ; or, lo, [he is] there; believe [him] not:

Mar 13:22 For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if [it were] possible, even the elect.

And don't forget:

Deuteronomy 4:2: Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

Deuteronomy 12:32: What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

Proverbs 30:5-6: Every word of God [is] pure: he [is] a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.