[Paridel]

I'm not saying you need to know the creeds to be Christian... simply that what you believe should coincide with the creeds. I see no reason why one cannot be completely unaware of their existence and yet be a valid Christian (however, I think this would raise considerable questions about the quality of such an individual's history teacher).

Someone who believes as you describe solely on the authority of the New Testament should have no issue with the creeds. There is nothing new in the creeds; they were written to essentially to serve in the function I described, as a litmus test to separate heretic from believers by men far more knowledgeable (are more adept at dealing with heresy) than myself.

However, if one rejects the trinity (as the Mormons do)...

thanks,
-paridel

[fproy2222]

However, if one rejects the trinity (as the Mormons do)...

++++++++++++++

I gota reply.

As I see it (this is my view, formed before becoming a “Mormon”) a creed is where a group of men got together and compromised on what should be gospel and what shouldn't be part of the gospel.

I see the cannon of the Bible also as a compromise among men.