~”You MUST be a Mormon. Only Mormons equate being a Christian with actions and not belief.”~
I ran across this today. This is Ryan Bell. Nobody terribly influential, but he says it better than I’ll shamelessly steal:
“For most people, seeing a person declare faith in Jesus Christ as the “Savior of mankind” is more than enough basis to call that person a Christian. Not so with modern evangelicals, for whom ‘Christian’ has become more a signifier of denominational purity than adoration of Christ. In their attempts to exclude Mormons from the club, evangelicals have had to do all kinds of gymnastics to tell us what “Christian” really means, and have ended up throwing Christ right out of the analysis. Reliance solely on the Bible, but also adherence to certain extra-biblical creeds, and emphasis on this New Testament passage (but not this one!) and historical unity with other Christian churches (except for all the disunity all the Christian churches have had with one another) are all more important than a declaration of Christ as savior.”
Source: http://www.romneyexperience.com/2008/01/28/romney-never-acknowledged-that-mormonism-is-not-a-christian-faith/
He brings up a good point: Are Evangelicals who harbor this philosophy worshiping the -doctrine- in lieu of the -Lord-? Has their dogma, in being raised to an importance above that of following Christ Himself, become their idol?
I believe that is the cause of the venom they spew. They have taken the Christ out of Christian.
Tanty, are you & "Ryan Bell" consistent on this?
Here, let me adjust Bell's comments as a parallel to Mormonism & let me see if you would agree if I wrote the following (which I didn't, since I'm shamelessly stealing--and tweaking a bit to fit the parallel):
“For most people, seeing a person give testimony that Joseph Smith is a prophet is more than enough basis to call that person a Mormon. Not so with Salt Lake City & other Utah Mormons north of Hildale, Utah, for whom 'Mormon' has become more a signifier of Zion purity than adoration of Christ. In their attempts to exclude polygamous, fundamentalist Mormons and even Mormon members who have a second wife from the club, the Utah Mormons have had to do all kinds of gymnastics to tell us what 'Mormon' really means, and have ended up throwing Joseph Smith right out of the analysis. Reliance solely on the standard works, but also adherence to certain extra-standard works' creeds (like God is an exalted man), and emphasis on this standard works' passage (but not this one like D&C 132 where it talks about polygamy being an "eternal covenant"!) and historical unity with other Book of Mormon-based churches (except for all the disunity all the Mormon offshoots have had with one another) are all more important than a testimony of Joseph Christ as prophet.”
He brings up a good point: Are Evangelicals who harbor this philosophy worshiping the -doctrine- in lieu of the -Lord-? Has their dogma, in being raised to an importance above that of following Christ Himself, become their idol?
So you would likewise then say that I have brought up a good point: Are Mormons who harbor this philosophy of one man & one woman worshiping that doctrine in lieu of the Lord? Has their marriage-for-time dogma (I mean they already believe in plural marriage-for-eternity...so what's the big deal about plural marriage-for-time?), in being raised to an importance above that of following Christ Himself--to the point where Mormons will ex-communicate polygamists from their midst, has the need to maintain a law-abiding image become an idol? (despite having broken the law of the land for 50 years at one point in direct contraction to an article in faith)
This is rich, coming from folks who rail that THEIR 'dogma' of the GODhead is the ONLY correct one!