Is Mormonism Christian?

Institute For Religious Research ^ | 1999 | Institute for Religious Research

[pby]

Is Mormonism Christian?

A Comparison of Mormonism and Historic Christianity Copyright © 1999 Institute for Religious Research. All rights reserved.

Is Mormonism Christian? This may seem like a puzzling question to many Mormons as well as to some Christians. Mormons will note that they include the Bible among the four books which they recognize as Scripture, and that belief in Jesus Christ is central to their faith, as evidenced by their official name, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Furthermore, many Christians have heard the Mormon Tabernacle Choir sing Christian hymns and are favorably impressed with the Mormon commitment to high moral standards and strong families. Doesn’t it follow that Mormonism is Christian?

[snip]

[restornu]

What does all mean we have names!

[MarkBsnr]

Are you saying that a member of the Utah Supreme Court is not a credible source?

[MarkBsnr]

Yes I was.

In my teens and 20s, I did a lot of wandering in the wilderness. I shunned God for years, and then under His nudging, I started to come back. My path led me through such diverse entities as the Crystal Cathedral, several different versions of the Church of Christ, the Salvation Army and some non denominational churches. I have been to ELCA and Missouri Synod Lutheran churches, and on my road back, in a conservative Anglican church.

I saw one common theme in all of them, whether doctrinal, bible-thumping or feel-good only. They are wholly and completely man-made. They also do not have the fullness of what Jesus left for us. They are very poor doctrinally - obviously some more than others.

Some have attempted to keep the spirit of the Church going - some Missouri Synod churches and Anglican churches appear and feel much more like the Church than some of the new Methodist-wannabe churches built over the last decade or so. Others simply have a stage on which a preening rooster struts up and down hectoring, lecturing and being the center of attention.

But they simply don’t have it. They don’t have the Eucharist, they don’t have the Sacraments, everything is symbolic or else it simply doesn’t exist. They have variations of fellowship or fear. But they are all man-made imitations of The Church, some much poorer than others.

Prodigal son? A lot of elements fit. And I was welcomed back to circumstances far greater than anything I deserve.

[MarkBsnr]

I have stated several times on this topic what my opinion is of the LDS individuals that I have met over time, both morally and ethically.

My issues are not with the overall behaviours of the individuals I have met. It is with the theology and the self-description. And not just with the Mormons.

An analogy might be:

First came the game of croquet. From that came cricket. From that came baseball. I have no issue with the creation of baseball. But don’t call it croquet.

[Elsie]

So are you actually saying it's OK to persecute someone if they recover later?

Did I actually say this?

No, it's you, putting words in my mouth.

[Elsie]

What does all mean we have names!

But some have demanded that their name never be pinged by me; so, I am merely following their wish.

[Elsie]

Thanks for telling us about your path.

They don’t have the Eucharist, they don’t have the Sacraments...

I've always wondered how the Passover meal, which was a yearly reminder of God's salvation, got morphed into something that happens every time the door to the church is open.

[Elsie]

My issues are not with the overall behaviours of the individuals I have met. It is with the theology and the self-description.

But when pressed about their theology, they seem to always fall back on their behavior, or on the simplistic - "Praise GOD! I just love Jesus so much!"

[Bryher1]

But... but... Mark 9:38-41... The Mormon’s certainly believe they are Christians. They certainly behave like Christians. They certainly do good work in the name of Jesus...

[MarkBsnr]

It was kind of a convoluted path, at that.

Josepth Smith didn’t do much different than Martin Luther. Both created a church; Luther lopped a whole lot of things off; both added to what was accepted and called it Scriptural. The only real difference is that Smith added a whole lot; Luther added much less. But they both added to what was. So, it’s really just a matter of degree or extent.

The Gospel of John is where we get the practice of daily Eucharist.

http://www.ronrolheiser.com/columnarchive/archive/arc013000.html says that:

For John, the Last Supper is in fact not so much a supper at all, but a long farewell discourse by Jesus. Into this context, John inserts a powerful Eucharistic motif, the washing of the feet of the disciples by Jesus, suggesting that what this gesture symbolizes is the true meaning of Eucharist. However, he also links the Eucharist to Jesus’ discourse on the bread of life, suggesting that the Eucharist is the new manna, the new bread that God gives us as a daily feeding. Scholars, such as Raymond Brown, suspect that John’s community celebrated the Eucharist daily, while some other first-century communities had it less frequently - quite parallel to the differences in Christian practice today. The Roman Catholic practice of daily Eucharist takes its theological foundation from John’s Gospel.

Oh those darn unBiblical Catholics...

[DelphiUser]

In post # 337 You said: "Meeting three days later, the mob issued an ultimatum: One-half of the Mormons must leave by year's end and the rest by April (1834).

And, sadly, some stayed behind and have been so badly persecuted that their descendants have only been able to buy and restore the old Nauvoo area."

So, I asked you "So are you actually saying it's OK to persecute someone if they recover later?"

You responded: "Did I actually say this?
No, it's you, putting words in my mouth."

I could not believe my ears, um Eyes, I thought Surely that is not the impression Elsie meant to leave, I'd better aske her to give he a chance to rephrase what she was saying, because that looks particularly cold hearted, she must have had another meaning.

So, I asked you a question. I did not put words in your mouth, and I would really like to give you one more opportunity to correct what you meant, because what you wrote looks bad.

I have in the past so butchered a post that what it said to others was not what I had intended. I would have loved for someone to give me a chance to "Correct" the record, and my impression of you from other posts is that you would not mean to say something so un-Christlike.

I am doing unto others what I wish others would do unto me (give me a second chance when I blow the first one). So (3rd chance)) please tell me I am mistaken, and explain what it was you did mean to say.

Oh, and Good morning.

[MarkBsnr]

Yes they do. LDS good works are abundant. However They use the name of Jesus and believe themselves to be Christians, but what does that mean?

It is not Biblically based to believe that: as man is, God once was; and as God is, man may become.

It is not an authorized doctrine of The Church. It is supported nowhere except in documents produced for the world by Joseph Smith (or more likely by the Campbellian Churches of Christ defector Sidney Rigdon).

[Bryher1]

The National Methodist Women’s group marched for “Choice” in Washington D.C. and they are considered Christian.

The United Church of Christ supports same-sex marriage and they are considered Christian.

The Presbyterian Church supports the use of fetal and embryonic tissue and stem cell research and they are considered Christian.

It seems to me that what Jesus was saying in Mark 9:38 was that you should judge whether a group is Christian by their actions. Even though the LDS folks believe some odd things, they seem to stand up for what is right better than many Catholic Bishops.

[Grig]

I don’t buy what someone sells just because they used to have an important position. Case in point: Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter....

[ladyinred]

Are you saying you don’t believe there is more than one God? My niece who is a Mormon says there is. Does the Church not really teach this?

[restornu]

No PM was being cute and said Joseph Smith, and I no he is not God,

I am sure someday a small “g” but not THE GOD or part of the GODHEAD; Father, Son and Holy Ghost!

Our spirits are eternal so all will be gods either with Heavenly Father or residing with the opposition which is also a god!

Did not Heavenly Father say I will not have anyother gods before me?

Heavenly Father was not refering to the Godhead, HF was talking about those who sided with Lucifer in the ploted to over throw Heavenly Father!

[Elsie]

So, I asked you "So are you actually saying it's OK to persecute someone if they recover later?"

Let me try to show you how it felt to me:

So, I asked you "So are you actually saying it's OK to beat your wife if they do not fix your eggs right?"

[Elsie]

What I was saying was the terrible FEAR that all the LDS folks would be slaughtered if they didn’t flee somewhere else never materialized for those to stayed behind!

[Elsie]

HMmmm...

NIV Matthew 26:26-31
 26.  While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body."
 27.  Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you.
 28.  This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
 29.  I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom."
 30.  When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.

Well, perhaps the bread and wine that they were eating turned into His REAL body and blood, while HE was still in their presence, but it seems like it would have been real messy.  What ISN'T seen in the text is that any FUTURE bread and wine would change into His body and blood.

It's seems like Paul or one of them other guys would have SURELY mentioned it in their writings about this 'change', but I fail to find it.

1 Corinthians 11:20-26
 20.  When you come together, it is not the Lord's Supper you eat,
 21.  for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else. One remains hungry, another gets drunk.
 22.  Don't you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you for this? Certainly not!
 23.  For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread,
 24.  and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me." 
 25.  In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."
 26.  For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.

1 Corinthians 11:34
   If anyone is hungry, he should eat at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment.   And when I come I will give further directions.

Does the RCC have these 'instructions' tucked away somewhere that didn't make it into the canon?

 

Given the prohibition about blood in the OT, surely the writer of Hebrews would have said SOMETHING about it as well.

[MarkBsnr]

Really, Elsie, you must encompass all the related verses to discern their proper meaning. The instructions are in the verses that you omitted. Naughty, naughty.

1 Cor 11:

20
When you meet in one place, then, it is not to eat the Lord’s supper,
21
for in eating, each one goes ahead with his own supper, and one goes hungry while another gets drunk.
22
Do you not have houses in which you can eat and drink? Or do you show contempt for the church of God and make those who have nothing feel ashamed? What can I say to you? Shall I praise you? In this matter I do not praise you.
23
11 For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread,
24
and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
25
In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”
26
For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes.
27
Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. 12
28
A person should examine himself, 13 and so eat the bread and drink the cup.
29
For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment 14 on himself.
30
That is why many among you are ill and infirm, and a considerable number are dying.
31
If we discerned ourselves, we would not be under judgment;
32
but since we are judged by (the) Lord, we are being disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world.
33
Therefore, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for one another.
34
If anyone is hungry, he should eat at home, so that your meetings may not result in judgment. The other matters I shall set in order when I come.

Very naughty. Go stand in the corner and say four Our Fathers and four Hail Marys. And a Glory Be.