Posted on 10/08/2007 7:49:32 AM PDT by colorcountry
Not only is Mormonism a Christian faith, it is the truest form of Christianity, said speaker after speaker on the first day of the 177th Semiannual LDS General Conference. LDS authorities were responding to the allegation that Mormonism isn't part of Christianity. Made by different mainline Protestant and Catholic churches and repeated constantly during coverage of Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, the claim is based on Mormonism's beliefs about God, its rejection of ancient ideas about the Trinity still widely accepted, and the LDS Church's extra-biblical scriptures. "It is not our purpose to demean any person's belief nor the doctrine of any religion," said Apostle Jeffrey R. Holland in the afternoon session. "But if one says we are not Christians because we do not hold a fourth- or fifth-century view of the Godhead, then what of those first [Christians], many of whom were eye-witnesses of the living Christ, who did not hold such a view either?"
{snip}
The day's sermons included many familiar themes, including the importance of faith, the need for pure thoughts and actions, avoiding pornography reaching out to neighbors and eliminating spiritual procrastination. Hinckley talked about the destructive nature of anger in marriages, on the road, and in life, urging Mormons to "control your tempers, to put a smile upon your faces, which will erase anger; speak with words of love and peace, appreciation and respect."
“Mormon doctrine is wrong, Mormon written scripture is uninspired, and Mormon sacramental practices are over the top.”
So decrees Xzins! Who dares disagree! Well, me for one.
“To the extent that anyone truly & biblically believes in the Jesus of the Bible through the words of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Paul, James, that person is a saved Christian in my opinion.”
That would include every faithful Mormon.
Name three, just three that you cn prove. ... And think about what it means if you cannot!
Since the evangelical definition of the trinity was not complete until nearly 400 years after the death of Christ, then the prophets and the apostles identified in the Bible are not Christians in that sense, either, since the “trinity” and its definition are not found in either the scriptures or in the writings of early Christian leaders.
Not to criticize . . . but I have noticed that some Christians are mixed up in who they pray to. Some say “Dear Father in Heaven” and end with “In Jesus’ Name we pray.” Some pray to Jesus but then they’re not sure how to end their prayer.
I have also noticed that no one ever prays to the Holy Ghost. “Dear Holy Ghost” and how would they end it?
Don’t you think it’s strange?
“You seriously want to defend this man as a prophet of God?”
All the attacks from his critics boil down to nothing more than sneer and smear, and repeating over and over again accusations that have already been shown to lack merit. They are not a threat to anyone but those who get sucked into rejecting a true prophet of God, Joseph Smith, so I don’t see my role as ‘defending’ Joseph, but rather as helping (as best I can give the time I have) sincere seekers of truth from being mislead by lies, distortions, half truths, hearsay, and other forms of deception.
His creative manifestation is the universe around you (see Romans 1). His Spirit moved upon 'the by Him created' substance that makes up the universe (see Genesis). He has taken a state a little lower than the angels, to redeem you who could not redeem yourself. Your denigration of Him by questioning His true nature is a most dangerous position to assume. Salvation comes in an instant ... you confess He is Messiah, the deliverer, and you need a deliverer, then your heart believes God raised Him from the dead to be your deliverer daily, alive in you.
When you play word games of His nature as simply and factually revealed in the writings of those He called for that purpose shortly after His ascension, you tempt retribution upon yourself. Why? How? Well, for almost 2000 years He has maintained the witness of Him via epistles written by those who had met Him personally. Please, Sister, consider the spirit that moves you now to defend Joseph Smith, a prven liar, adulterer, false prophet.
(Grig wrote) There are many claim in the BoM that have been validated, and there are others for which there currently is no validating evidence, but none of these claims are beyond the realm of what is possible.
While it is difficult to say from a historical perspective that anything is ‘impossible’, to say that there were continent spanning iron and horse using cultures in North American prehistory (as the Book of Momon does) is about as close as you can come to that. While I respect your desire to defend your beliefs, any such cultures as described in the Book of Mormon would have left extensive material remains, as well as a legacy in oral history.
(Grig wrote) Mormonism is not a rejection of the Bible or of Christ, it is a rejection of the interpretations of men.
I would put it to you that this is exactly what Mormonism is. In claiming (and again, please correct me if I'm wrong. I have no desire to slander Mormon beliefs) that men have corrupted Scripture, Mormonism has substituted its own texts and elavated them to a higher standing. Is an angel or the word of an angel (Moroni) higher than that of the Son of God? The Bible has spoken clearly through the Spirit through generations, and continues to do so. You are absolutely right to say that there have been false interpretations and teachers, as scripture itself says there will be. These falsehoods are repudiated though through the Word of God.
Has not Mormonism merely substituted its own human interpretation based on its own internal books, and in so doing rejected the Word sent by God through Christ?
Your interpretations of Christian beliefs in your post reflect this, and I'd be happy to discuss any of them in more detail with you through looking at the full texts.
I would also question your casting away of some of the more uncomfortable assertions of Mormon theology through the statement that they are 'not doctrinal'. If by this you mean they are not required beliefs, this does not remove the fact that they were statements made by the man you consider the founder and prophet of your faith. Are you also saying that statements made in a Mormon book called 'Doctrines of Salvation' are not doctrinal?
The question in the end is truth. If my faith s not 'true', then most certainly I would want to repudiate it and tell others to do so. It is not defence of 'our' beliefs that is important, but the seeking of God's truth. You mention that;
(Grig wrote) There are many differences between Mormonism and what YOU HAVE BEEN TAUGHT about Christ’s gospel.
Having not grown up in a Christian household, what I have been taught about Christ has come from a reading of Scripture, with humble prayer to the Holy Spirit for guidance.
May His Peace and Grace be with you.
Thanks.
But this would be a very slim percentage.
Most of us hang around to do battle man-to-man; High Noon style.
Finally!
An answer we can sink our teeth into!
I too am committed to following Jesus Christ and his teachings, which makes me a disciple of Jesus Christ. According to Acts 11:26, that also makes me a Christian.
And what are you if you follow the teachings of Joseph Smith?
There goes that - "You can't tell a book by it's Cover" thing!
One down; zillions to go...
One cannot say that about the RLDS folks; the ones who REALLY carry the torch that Moroni lit.
That would include anyone who truly and biblically believes the record of the original Apostles. Theirs is the word of God consistent with Jesus’ prayer, “All who believe in me throught THEIR word...”
There is nothing in that text about anyone else’s words some 1800+ years later in New York State.
Therefore, xzins does say that Mormon doctrine is wrong, Mormon written scripture is uninspired, and Mormon sacramental practices are over the top. I say it on the authority of the scripture given by the men Jesus specifically selected to give His word.
Now, anyone...Mormon raised, Baptist raised, Catholic raised, Buddhist raised, etc.....who, in reading the record about Jesus by Jesus’ personally selected Apostles, comes to true, biblical faith in Jesus is a saved person. He is then in the hands of the Almighty.
The Almighty will lead His sheep to green pastures.
>> “But if one says we are not Christians because we do not hold a fourth- or fifth-century view of the Godhead, then what of those first [Christians], many of whom were eye-witnesses of the living Christ, who did not hold such a view either?” <<
“We have to be correct, because we’re correct.” It’s true that if early Christians did hold beliefs consistent with Mormonism, then Mormons would be properly known as Christians. But the assertion that early Christians had a Mormon-like belief in the Godhead is absolutely baseless. Unless you believe in the Book of Mormon. And that requires simply an act of faith, because Joe Smith’s story would inspire giggles in even little children. Mormonism survives because Mormons are nice, not because the story is sensible.
Intelligent of you ;)
Yeah, Jefferson was a quintessential rationalist. He didn’t believe in miracles, so he rewrote his own NT with them “conveniently” excised.
Jefferson had some glimmers of greatness in his own way, but theologian he was not!!
“Thomas Jefferson denied it too, didn’t stop him from becoming POTUS.”
Jefferson, was simply wrong.
He was not, however, in a cult.
The author asserts that: “Some of the crucial concepts employed by these creeds, such as “substance”, “person”, and “in two natures” are post-biblical novelties.”
Really? Postbiblical? Let’s take an NT quote straight from Christ’s mouth: John 10:30:
“I and the Father are one.”
Let’s examine that grammatically.
There are two subjects in the sentence: “I” and “Father”, one personal pronoun and one proper name. In grammatical terminology, these clearly specify two separate persons: “I” is a different person than “you” or “he”. That’s why we call them personal pronouns.
Next is the plural...note plural....of the verb “to be” indicates that we are defining some quality of the two things already specified. The two subjects both share some quality. What’s that quality? Well, the predicate follows the verb and tells us *what quality* they share: “one”. Cryptic. They share the quality of one? Well, it means that that they share *everything*. “We are one”...means you and I are the same thing. But despite being same thing, we *still* are individual persons.
Christ could have said any number of things differently here. He could have said “I am the Father”: two names, but one person and one nature. He could have said “I and the Father are separate”: two persons with two natures.
But he said none of those things. He mentioned two separate persons in the sentence, and he said that those separate persons are one, i.e. that they share the same nature.
Nicaea resolutely and boldly defended this idea that—though incredible perhaps—came straight from the mouth of Christ Himself. It changed nothing.
“While it is difficult to say from a historical perspective that anything is ‘impossible’, to say that there were continent spanning iron and horse using cultures in North American prehistory (as the Book of Momon does) is about as close as you can come to that.”
‘Continent spanning’ is pretty exaggerated. There is not a lot of geographic information in the BoM (not it’s main purpose) but from what is there it seems they were not nearly so spread out as that. In examining all the information, it seems everything took place within an area few hundred miles in diameter. http://en.fairmormon.org/index.php/Book_of_Mormon_geography:New_World
As for iron, several tons of iron artifacts dating back to the Olmec civilization have been found. The Olmecs are very good candidates for the Jaradite civilization in the BoM and they pre-date the Nephites by several centuries. That and other issues about metals in the BoM are covered at http://en.fairmormon.org/index.php/Book_of_Mormon_anachronisms:Metals
Also, the remains of some pre-Columbian horses have been found. http://en.fairmormon.org/index.php/Book_of_Mormon_anachronisms:Animals#Horse so as has happened before, what once was something that caused some to question the BoM now becomes evidence in it’s favor.
Given that the Nephite civilization was totally destroyed by war, it’s survivors descended into barbarism, and there is no way to know what else went on in the 1000+ years between Moroni and Columbus, I really don’t think there is any reasonable basis to say how much and what kind of evidence should have survived. Those kind of claims just seem like a way of moving the goal posts, first they say there is no evidence, we show evidence, then they say there should be more evidence than that if it was true.
The Book of Mormon has been around for 177 years. When it first came out there was no evidence of anything claimed in it. If it was faked, you would expect that as time went on it would become less and less credible, but the opposite has happened.
“I would put it to you that this is exactly what Mormonism is.”
Of course. Like I said before, the real question is whose interpretation is correct, and how does one determine which is correct. Good, honest, sincere people have been reading the same Bible passages and understanding them differently for 2000 years so I’m not inclined to rely on man’s wisdom in this matter. I would recommend that you read the BoM yourself, consider what it says, ask yourself if an unschooled farm boy could have written it, then take whatever conclusion you reach to God in prayer and ask him if your conclusion is correct or not. All this stuff about evidences for the BoM is interesting, but what really counts is if it is God’s word or not and only God can give the final answer on that.
“In claiming (and again, please correct me if I’m wrong. I have no desire to slander Mormon beliefs) that men have corrupted Scripture, Mormonism has substituted its own texts and elavated them to a higher standing. Is an angel or the word of an angel (Moroni) higher than that of the Son of God?”
No, Moroni doesn’t trump Christ. What we are saying is that the Bible as we have it today is not a perfect match for how it was originally recorded by the prophets and apostles. We believe there has been some corruption of the text http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/1999_Corruption_of_Scripture_in_the_Second_Century.html , but far more serious are the parts of the scriptures that have become lost http://scriptures.lds.org/en/bd/l/40 . This has lead to a lack of clarity on some points, for example, some consider baptism a requirement, others think it optional. The BoM testifies of the truth of the Bible and restores a full understanding of the gospel. I do not know of one instance where we see a conflict between what the BoM teaches and the Bible teaches, but the BoM does conflict with interpretations of the Bible that we consider false.
“Has not Mormonism merely substituted its own human interpretation based on its own internal books, and in so doing rejected the Word sent by God through Christ?”
If the BoM is everything it claims to be (and I believe it is), then Joseph was a true prophet of God and the church is lead by revelation, not by the understanding of man and is the only true and living church on the face of the earth today. If the BoM is everything it claims to be, it is non-Mormons who are rejecting the word of God and God’s living prophet.
“I would also question your casting away of some of the more uncomfortable assertions of Mormon theology through the statement that they are ‘not doctrinal’. If by this you mean they are not required beliefs, this does not remove the fact that they were statements made by the man you consider the founder and prophet of your faith. Are you also saying that statements made in a Mormon book called ‘Doctrines of Salvation’ are not doctrinal?”
I don’t intend to cast them away, it’s just that you assert them as our doctrines when they are not, they are the views of individual church leaders and members are not obligated to accept them as truth. What is doctrine is what is in our scriptures. Official church publications like lesson manuals, church published magazines etc. are closely reviewed to ensure they conform to doctrine, but they are not on the same level as scripture is.
Books like ‘Doctrines of Salvation’, ‘Mormon Doctrine’ etc. are commercial publication, not church publications, and the content reflects only the view of the author(s). The title reflect the topic, not the authority of the book. Be especially careful of anything from the ‘Journal of Discourses’ it is not a church publication, and there is good reason to question the accuracy of the transcripts in it, but our critics love to gloss over that or outright present it as an accurate, official record.
Even if some non-doctrinal opinion is consistent with our doctrines and widely held by the membership, there is still the possibility that it will be inconsistent with some future revelation. Prophets are not omniscient like God, on matters where there is no revelation, they are as free to form their own opinions as any other man, and those opinions do not carry any divine sanction.
“The question in the end is truth. If my faith s not ‘true’, then most certainly I would want to repudiate it and tell others to do so. It is not defence of ‘our’ beliefs that is important, but the seeking of God’s truth.”
I am glad to hear that. I strongly recommend that instead of reading what others (including myself) say about the BoM, that you read the BoM yourself. There is this promise at the end:
Moroni 10
4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.
Put that promise to the test.
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.