Your response:
A) Assuming the consequent again...
Delf...I do desire to be civil with you here and have a brief exchange...so let's -- just for the moment at least on this point -- put aside which version of Christianity is "genuine" and which is a "counterfeit" -- if any of them even are.
Can we not at least agree that we ARE talking about mutually exclusive positioning here?
Your teaching is that the Lds church is "the only true and living church on the face of the earth." (D&C 1:30). However personally civil you might be, DU, that pronouncement alone shoves me, all Protestants, all Catholics, and all Orthodox out the door of true Christianity.
My label of Mormonism then as "counterfeit" is really not any different than your label of non-Mormon Christianity as "apostate"...false and dead...corrupt and abominable.
There is no middle ground then that the Mormon church allows here. Even tho we oft see comments from Lds leaders re: "the rest of Christianity" (like I saw on a recent BYU Maxwell Institute piece on Christian apostasy)...or a tone of "we're Christians, too"...the Lds version of "Christianity" is quite intolerant of any legit "competitors" to that brand name...and in the long run, doesn't wish to share "Christian" as fellow brand managers.
So...Lds assume the consequent that we are corrupt, false, dead, abominable apostates; and we assume the consequent that Lds are counterfeit, heretical, and cultic.
So even if you and I don't wish to interactively wrestle with "who is right" on those questions, we can at least recognize that ecumenical "brand sharing" is really out of the question. Right?
Otherwise, evangelicals would need to halt its witnessing to Mormons; and Mormon missionaries would need to "move on" upon discovering that the doorbell they just rung are committed Christians.
And none of that will ever happen. Right?
There, frankly, is NO respect on either side for the "other side" having a "legit" claim to the brand name of Christ. So, let's at least don't fall into clap-trap of pretending otherwise.
Are there any pts of agreement here?
C “(a) That they counterfeit themselves as “Christians” (if they want to sell the Mormon brand, tis another matter)”
D “A) Assuming the consequent again...”
C “Delf...I do desire to be civil with you here and have a brief exchange...so let’s — just for the moment at least on this point — put aside which version of Christianity is “genuine” and which is a “counterfeit” — if any of them even are.”
Agreed.
C “Can we not at least agree that we ARE talking about mutually exclusive positioning here?”
As long as you insist the the trinity is true, and I insist that the Godhead is the correct definition, we are at an impass.
C “Your teaching is that the LDS church is “the only true and living church on the face of the earth.” (D&C 1:30). However personally civil you might be, DU, that pronouncement alone shoves me, all Protestants, all Catholics, and all Orthodox out the door of true Christianity.”
As does the pronouncement by the Catholics that all non Catholics are heretics or pagans. They declared that for years, I’m sure you know. I’m also sure that you know that many Protestant churches damned each other to hell for may years.
C “My label of Mormonism then as “counterfeit” is really not any different than your label of non-Mormon Christianity as “apostate”...false and dead...corrupt and abominable.”
Logical.
C “There is no middle ground then that the Mormon church allows here. Even tho we oft see comments from Lds leaders re: “the rest of Christianity” (like I saw on a recent BYU Maxwell Institute piece on Christian apostasy)...or a tone of “we’re Christians, too”...the Lds version of “Christianity” is quite intolerant of any legit “competitors” to that brand name...and in the long run, doesn’t wish to share “Christian” as fellow brand managers.”
Ah, here is the rub, Christian is imbued with Special meaning by Orthodox Christianity.
IMHO, The term Christian should apply to any one who follows Christ’s teachings no matter how he/she interprets the Bible or other books on Christ to get to those teachings.
Buddhists follow Buddha, Lutherans follow Luther, but we who follow Jesus are denied that association by you and yours.
Just for the record, if you were to say I am not an Orthodox Christian, I would immediately agree and without complaint!
C “So...Lds assume the consequent that we are corrupt, false, dead, abominable apostates; and we assume the consequent that Lds are counterfeit, heretical, and cultic.”
Not even remotely, we assume that since we think we are Christian, and You think you are Christian (even though we disagree on what that means) so we should both be called Christians and then denominations should be used to differtiate our differing beliefs.
This is how it is done in Buddhist, Muslim, and even pagan religions.
C “So even if you and I don’t wish to interactively wrestle with “who is right” on those questions, we can at least recognize that ecumenical “brand sharing” is really out of the question. Right?”
Nope, I think it can be done, there was even an ecumenical conference held in the tabernacle in Salt Lake (all they had to do was ask they even let some of us sit in!).
I have some Relatives whom I love dearly who never joined the LDS, they are Calvinists, we get along well, they tried to convert us, so we tried back, they tried again, it was fun as long as no one got bent out of shape.
C “Otherwise, evangelicals would need to halt its witnessing to Mormons; and Mormon missionaries would need to “move on” upon discovering that the doorbell they just rung are committed Christians.”
Just for the record, I have never been bothered by someone witnessing to me, and I let in anyone preaching Jesus, even if they are not of my faith... I am even friendly wiht the Jehovah’s Winesses here (yep, in Utah, whoda thunk?) I figure, God just may want me to think about him more today, Message received!
C “And none of that will ever happen. Right?”
I dunno, I’m game.
C “There, frankly, is NO respect on either side for the “other side” having a “legit” claim to the brand name of Christ. So, let’s at least don’t fall into clap-trap of pretending otherwise.”
I am truly sorry you feel that way, I don’t. Let me put it in a partisan, friendly sparring context, OK?
I don’t want you to stop praying in Jesus’ name just because you got the definition wrong.
I certainly don’t want you to try to call yourself something else and drive you further from Christ.
I want to encourage you to study, pray with me and come to a higher understanding, and I just might learn something too!
If you die without joining and having ordinances performed by the authority of Jesus Christ, I’ll see to it that they are done by proxy later so that you’ll have that technicality out of the way and can be judged for the really good person that you are.
OK, enough of the snarkyness, it’s fun but sometimes counter productive.
The point is, that is the way a lot of “ecumenical Christians” are with each other, we can play ball on that, just don’t expect us to drop our beliefs that are different for you, and you can keep yours that are different from us (until you learn better - Sorry!)
C “Are there any pts of agreement here?”
Yup, I see em! As Christains, I believe we should both be caring and loving the other person into Christs arms, not trying to push the other out of his grasp.
Delph