If I may interject, the specific issue is defining what is and what is not a “Christian.” All your arguments re divine ontology, cosmological weltanshauung, revelatory continuity, and so forth are besides the point. The issue is “what is and what is not a Christian.”
What standard is then appropriate? Naturally the Bible but it does NOT create the criteria. IOW, it does not say a person must believe X, Y, Z in order to be a Christian. John’s shibboleth (http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/bicycleroad/21/id62.htm #23 & 24) was aimed at the protognostics (and is utterly devastating to the Baha’i religions btw since it is impossible for Baha’ullah’s claim to comply with John’s condition - see endnote 16 in http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/bicycleroad/21/id62.htm ) but sadly the rest of the NT canon lacks similar demarcations re what is and what isn’t a Christian.
What then must an honest person do? Naturally, examine the biblical beliefs concerning the person of Christ by those KNOWN to be Christians.
Only a person utterly ignorant of the diversity of beliefs and practices of first, second, and third century Christianity, with the scores of competing groups (especially the Gnostics, Judaists, Johannine, and Syrian churches, including the outrageous Carpocratians) would use the standards you employed in claiming Mormons are not Christian.
Stick to the Bible! Does it ever say a person must NOT believe Heavenly Father has possession of a glorious, immortal, material body in addition to being a spirit entity in order to be Christian? Of course not. Pneuma ho theos simply states God is spirit, but since Mormons believe humans are also spirit entities who are united with a material (albeit mortal and weak) body; the contrast is not mutually exclusive. It is possible for both man and God to have both.
I can use the same approach with every single one of your arguments denying Mormons are Christian:
“Does the Bible ever say a person must NOT believe ______________ in order to be Christian?
Every single one is answered in the negative. Ergo, the entire edifice is a red herring and a logical fallacy.
Stick to the Bible! It isn’t hard. What then did the NT Christians believe that MADE THEM Christians?
Well, that’s easy to the honest person. They believed Jesus Christ is:
The Savior.
The Redeemer.
The Messiah.
The Lamb of God.
The Son of God.
God.
The I AM.
The Son of Man.
Born of a virgin.
The First/Last.
The Creator.
The Paraclete/ Advocate/ Comforter.
The Mediator/ Intercessor/ Reconciler.
He died for our sins.
He died on the cross.
He rose from the dead.
The Judge.
The Foundation.
The Rock.
The only Begotten Son of God.
Worshiped.
The name used to pray to the Father.
Obeyed.
We take upon ourselves his name.
The only source of Salvation and the greatest name possible
As I’ve proven, every single biblical criteria for what is a Christian is found in Mormonism (http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/bicycleroad/21/id108.htm ).
However, what you can do when highlighting the differences between what you believe from ours is show Mormonism believes different things than the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant branches of Christianity. Classification-wise, we are all “Christian,” just belonging to different branches.
This irrational intolerance by some “Christians” against Mormonism is foolish, and dishonest. I fully allow you to be considered “Christian” despite you believe things diametric to what I consider genuine characteristics of Christianity. For example, your belief in a God foreign to NT thought that is based on pagan Greek philosophical concepts (God is mind, ontologically formless, nonmaterial, and omnipresent, comprising three hypostatis in one ousia) would be appalling to a NT Christian with a Hebraic mindset outside Philo’s influence. Despite this fundamental difference, Mormons still accept you as Christian, just not belonging to the LDS branch of it.
If you really want to know what Mormons believe, see my free books:
Everything about God the Father: http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/bicycleroad/21/id26.htm
Everything about God the Son: http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/bicycleroad/21/id27.htm
Everything about God the Holy Ghost: http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/bicycleroad/21/id28.htm
Everything about the Doctrine of Exaltation: http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/bicycleroad/21/id33.htm
Everything about the first century Apostasy: http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/bicycleroad/21/id32.htm
If you think you can refute a single chapter, feel free. Twenty years of debating anti-Mormons has convinced me there is not a single argument against Mormonism that holds water.
Oh, and DelphiUser, thanks! I hope my other works are similarly beneficial.
LOL! An honest to goodness LDS Apologist.
The most accurate thing you said is this: “ Twenty years of debating anti-Mormons has convinced me there is not a single argument against Mormonism that holds water.”
I’m sure you ARE utterly convinced. So was I when I was Mormon.
Oh BTW Watson, I know a family of polygamous Watsons from Bluffdale. Part of the United Brethren group. You related?
Mormonism is founded upon the heretical notion that God's Holy Spirit 'lost something' from the human family after the last Apostle died who walked with Jesus. That such a lie is fundamental to the 'restoration' argument of Joseph Smith in his new religion he claimed restored 'real' Christianity says a volume about the basis for following Mormonism.
Mormonism requires the adherent to hold a notion that Jesus would not send His Holy Spirit to one confessing with their mouth that God has raised Him from the dead if that profession occurred AFTER the death of the last Apostle and before the advent of Joe Smith. THAT is heresy, Watson. Regardless of your convoluted arguments regarding Greek influences, etc., Mormonism is founded upon an essential heresy and adherents are admonished to hold a 'testimony' that this heretical notion is truth.
Foundational:
17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself adelivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I bsaw two cPersonages, whose brightness and dglory defy all description, estanding above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the otherThis is My fBeloved gSon. Hear Him!18 My object in going to ainquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)and which I should join.19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all awrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those bprofessors were all ccorrupt; that: they ddraw near to me with their lips, but their ehearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the fcommandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the gpower thereof.20 He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself alying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home. And as I leaned up to the fireplace, bmother inquired what the matter was. I replied, Never mind, all is wellI am well enough off. I then said to my mother, I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.