Why Do Christians Say Mormons Are Not Christian?

[johnny]

soren

You should. God is our prupose, we are not his.

I am referring to "will", the Son seeks to do the will of the Father (John 5:30). If the Son is doing the will of the Father "they are one in purpose". That purpose is man's salvation.

[soren]

We are the same race/family/kin to GOD according to Acts 17;28 - Offspring - Greek - "genos".

"Genos" has a lot of meanings in Greek, among which is a type or group of individuals with the same nature. But in this context it refers to a group of individuals who share a common origin. To say that we are all "his genos" means that we were all made by God we are his "genos" because he is our origin. This fits the context in which God is contrasted with the pagans deities who are not the makers of the world, but are themselves creations of human art. This is not to deny that God is our Father in a true familial sense; I only say that this particular verse is not specifically about that.

[soren]

soren

I am referring to "will", the Son seeks to do the will of the Father (John 5:30). If the Son is doing the will of the Father "they are one in purpose". That purpose is man's salvation.

That's fine, but be warned: LDS theology takes it farther than that. In your usage, "purpose" indicates God's will in the sense of what he has freely chosen to do something; in the LDS sense, it is an existential statement in the sense that it constitutes him as God.

[johnny]

Mola Ram Suda Ra...

It is all about the will of the Son being swallowed up by the will of the Father. The Son always did the will of the Father.

Common in this is really simple.

2Cor.5:19 is NOT even about talking about "the will", it is saying "God was in Christ".

You have competely ignored 2Cor 5:19 ...

It is a whole lot easier to see that all of the "one" is talking about purpose and wills than it is to see one in being. As we know that There is but one God.

You say "we know that There is but one God", Joseph Smith says "three Gods".

Further more Because God the Father was Jesus mortal Father He was in Him.

What do you mean "in Him" ... please explain ... do you mean the Father dwelt in the Son?

Just as I am in my kids. THere is no escaping that. But the scriptures arent talking about that aspect

There is a big difference ... you do not dwell in your kids ... Jesus said the Father dwelt in him, and the indwelling Father did the works.

[ttribe]

According to a few people on this board, there's around 10,000 different EV groups, and I have no reason to doubt that. I don't go to each group to investigate their beliefs.

Then tell me who I should and shouldn't be investigating based on the ones you do know (you're being cagey...time to be straightforward).

EVs don't say you're going to hell because you're a Mormon, they say you're going to hell because Mormon doctrine rejects Christ's plan of salvation. EVs aren't saying they get to judge. They've never claimed to have that role. They believe Mormons are going to hell, not because they say so, but because they believe Mormon doctrine rejects Christ's plan of salvation.

Well obviously we have a difference of opinion here, especially since it is OBVIOUS and CLEARLY STATED that we believe Christ's atonement is 100% necessary for salvation. Are you going to start telling me what I believe now?

Most EVs are doing this out of love, not hate. They are trying to send their message in a loving way, but they aren't perfect and they can't plan for every possible response.

Try to put yourself in their shoes. If you believed a group was rejecting Christ's doctrine and going to hell for it, how would you reach out to them?

You are being more than a little patronizing here. Having served a mission in the U.S. South (TN and KY to be exact), I can tell you that I've had to do just that (except I don't believe EVs are going to hell in the sense you believe I am). Without going into a myriad of detail, I can tell you some things I've NEVER done - 1) never stood in front of their places of worship mocking things that are sacred to them; 2) I've never screamed at them about their beliefs (while TELLING them they're going to hell); 3) I've never gone onto one of their websites and tried to tear down their beliefs or mock them in any way; 4) I've never intentionally told a lie or half-truth about their beliefs in an effort to convince people of some church's "evil ways" (i.e. Godmakers). You get the point yet?

[Billy]

let me ask you just one question, do you feel that baptism is something that not every body is able to do?

I disagree that Baptism isnt required. If that were the case they just shouldnt have every talked about it.

I think that everybody should be able to get baptized.

Say you have two people, both God fearing and both have faith in God. If you looked at their lives they have fruit in their life equal to each other. One is baptized and the other is not, do you think that one should go to heaven and the other should go to hell, if all else is equal?

[johnny]

Log

Did the fullness of the Godhead dwell in Christ by virtue of his relationship with the Father?

It was NOT because of "his relationship", it was because the Word, which was God, was made flesh (John 1:1,14)

Maybe I am misunderstanding you - you seemed to be telling me that the Apostles did not have the same relationship with Christ and the Father as Christ had with the Father. If that is not what you are saying, then the error is mine.

"one in being" is NOT about a relationship.

[Akboy]

May I interrupt this fascinating argument to mention something I have noticed?

There seems to be a direct corrolary among EV Christians as follows, which I will set forth as a working hypothesis:

Those Evangelical Christians who are certain Mormons are going to hell seem less likely to call Mormons Christian than those Evangelical Christians who think that individual Mormons may be in a saved state.

That may be too dense (like its author).

In othe words, some evanglical Christians are convinced that all Mormons are going to hell by virtue of membership in the Mormon Church. These evangelical Christians seem unlikely to call Mormons "Christian."

Other evangelical Christians are open to the possibility that God's grace can reach certain individual Mormons while still in the Mormon church, based upon whether the individual Mormon is in a "right relationship" with God. This group of evangelical Christians seem more likely to call Mormons "Christian."

What do you think?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

This depends on how "Mormon" is defined. Is a Mormon someone who regularly attends an LDS church and has their name on the membership list? In other words, can someone be a Mormon if they disagree with some core Mormon doctrines? Or is a Mormon someone who believes and follows the doctrines of the church?

If it's the first one, I have no problem saying some Mormons are saved. Most EVs will tell you salvation is based on a person's belief, not what church they attend.

If, however, the definition is the second one, then I would say I believe all Mormons are headed for hell.

P.S. A few pages ago, you said, The scriptures teach that Christians are those who take upon themselves the name of Christ. Where in the scriptures does it teach that? And what does it mean to take on the name of Christ?

[Tanyan]

JESUS Lives because of the Father - John 6:57 - "Live" - "zoe" = spiritual life, "the" - "dia" in greek = "Because Of" from my understanding.

Tanyan.

[soren]

Log

It was NOT because of "his relationship", it was because the Word, which was God, was made flesh (John 1:1,14)

"one in being" is NOT about a relationship.

I beg to differ on both points becasue the oneness of the Father and Son is a oneness of two related parties, whose relationship is a necessary predicate of their existence, although this may be too technical a point.

In any case, John 17:21 as an objection to the Trinity is a red herring, becasue that verse is not saying "one in purpose" or "one in being" precisely, but rather "one in sanctification and love" and by implication "one in the Holy Spirit," as I have shown in my earlier posts. As such, it is not a problem text for either Catholic or Mormon theology.

[soren]

JESUS Lives because of the Father - John 6:57 - "Live" - "zoe" = spiritual life, "the" - "dia" in greek = "Because Of" from my understanding.

Tanyan.

"Dia" with an accusative object has a broad semantical range which includes "because of" but also can mean "through," "on account of," "for the sake of," "by way of" and a lot of other things that easily fit into Trintarian thinking.

[consiglieri]

P.S. A few pages ago, you said, The scriptures teach that Christians are those who take upon themselves the name of Christ. Where in the scriptures does it teach that? And what does it mean to take on the name of Christ?

Alma 46:15 And those who did belong to the church were faithful; yea, all those who were true believers in Christ took upon them, gladly, the name of Christ, or Christians as they were called, because of their belief in Christ who should come.

But what I am interested in is what you think about Mormons. Are they all damned without exception, or is it possible in your view for any of them to be saved while still retaining membership in the Mormon Church and being members in good standing?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Billy]

Well obviously we have a difference of opinion here, especially since it is OBVIOUS and CLEARLY STATED that we believe Christ's atonement is 100% necessary for salvation.

In terms of salvation, what exactly does Christ's atonement do for you?

[johnny]

soren

I beg to differ on both points becasue the oneness of the Father and Son is a oneness of two related parties, whose relationship is a necessary predicate of their existence, although this may be too technical a point.

Could you please provide your description of "one in being" and provide some scriptures to support "one in being" ... thanks

In any case, John 17:21 as an objection to the Trinity is a red herring, becasue that verse is not saying "one in purpose" or "one in being" precisely, but rather "one in sanctification and love" and by implication "one in the Holy Spirit," as I have shown in my earlier posts. As such, it is not a problem text for either Catholic or Mormon theology.

Do you think 1Cor 6:16 captures John 17:21, it says "he that is joined unot the Lord is one spirit"?

1Cor.6 ([15] Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. [17] But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.[19] What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?)

[Akboy]

But what I am interested in is what you think about Mormons. Are they all damned without exception, or is it possible in your view for any of them to be saved while still retaining membership in the Mormon Church and being members in good standing?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

That depends on what the definition of "Mormon" is, as I explained in the last post. I'm not a member of the church, so I'm not going to presume I know how to define the word. If it's the first definition, then no, they are not all damned without exception. But if it's the second, then they are all headed for hell. In both cases the same rule applies: salvation is about someone's belief, not what church they attend. So is Mormon a description of the church they attend, or their beliefs?

[Akboy]

Alma 46:15 And those who did belong to the church were faithful; yea, all those who were true believers in Christ took upon them, gladly, the name of Christ, or Christians as they were called, because of their belief in Christ who should come.

How did the author of that book know Christ's followers were called 'Christians?' I thought the term was originally a derogatory term coined by critics of the early church. How would this author know about that?

[Log]

In any case, John 17:21 as an objection to the Trinity is a red herring, becasue that verse is not saying "one in purpose" or "one in being" precisely, but rather "one in sanctification and love" and by implication "one in the Holy Spirit," as I have shown in my earlier posts.

Except the text says neither of these things.

And I will agree that it poses no problem for Trinitarian thinking - indeed, I cannot come up with anything that could do so, even in principle.

[johnny]

soren

That's fine, but be warned: LDS theology takes it farther than that. In your usage, "purpose" indicates God's will in the sense of what he has freely chosen to do something; in the LDS sense, it is an existential statement in the sense that it constitutes him as God.

Could you provide a link or some actual Mormon theology that supports the view you expressed above .. thanks.

[johnny]

Log

Except the text says neither of these things.

The text is about sanctification (see bold words below);

John.17 ([17] Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. [21] That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. [22] And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: [23] I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

Heb.2 ([10] For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. [11] For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,)

1Cor.6 ([17] But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. )

[ttribe]

In terms of salvation, what exactly does Christ's atonement do for you?

Washes away my sins, reconciles me to the Father. Are you going to now try to tell me that this is not what "Mormonism" believes, 'cuz if you are, you are barking up the wrong tree.

[ttribe]

How did the author of that book know Christ's followers were called 'Christians?' I thought the term was originally a derogatory term coined by critics of the early church. How would this author know about that?

There are two possibilities: 1) the term was used amongst a small group of people on the American Continent and "history" didn't know until the Book of Mormon was revealed; or 2) Given that we believe it was a TRANSLATION we believe the "term" was given to Joseph Smith as a matter of understanding (since it was a term he was familiar with and conveyed the same meaning). Will you now remove this from your list of "evidence" that the Book of Mormon is false since these are reasonably plausible explanations?

I think that everybody should be able to get baptized.Say you have two people, both God fearing and both have faith in God. If you looked at their lives they have fruit in their life equal to each other. One is baptized and the other is not, do you think that one should go to heaven and the other should go to hell, if all else is equal?

Gee, looks like there are divisions amongst the EV's. Who's following Christ ACCURATELY? No one seems to want to answer that question.

[LeSellers]

A few pages ago, you said, The scriptures teach that Christians are those who take upon themselves the name of Christ. Where in the scriptures does it teach that? And what does it mean to take on the name of Christ?

13 And he fastened on his head-plate, and his breastplate, and his shields, and girded on his armor about his loins; and he took the pole, which had on the end thereof his rent coat, (and he called it the title of liberty) and he bowed himself to the earth, and he prayed mightily unto his God for the blessings of liberty to rest upon his brethren, so long as there should a band of Christians remain to possess the landâ?? 14 For thus were all the true believers of Christ, who belonged to the church of God, called by those who did not belong to the church.

13 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, I know that if ye shall follow the Son, with full purpose of heart, acting no hypocrisy and no deception before God, but with real intent, repenting of your sins, witnessing unto the Father that ye are willing to take upon you the name of Christ, by baptismâ??yea, by following your Lord and your Savior down into the water, according to his word, behold, then shall ye receive the Holy Ghost; yea, then cometh the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost; and then can ye speak with the tongue of angels, and shout praises unto the Holy One of Israel.

2 And it came to pass that there was not one soul, except it were little children, but who had entered into the covenant and had taken upon them the name of Christ.

38 That ye contend no more against the Holy Ghost, but that ye receive it, and take upon you the name of Christ; that ye humble yourselves even to the dust, and worship God, in whatsoever place ye may be in, in spirit and in truth; and that ye live in thanksgiving daily, for the many mercies and blessings which he doth bestow upon you.

37 And again, by way of commandment to the church concerning the manner of baptismâ??All those who humble themselves before God, and desire to be baptized, and come forth with broken hearts and contrite spirits, and witness before the church that they have truly repented of all their sins, and are willing to take upon them the name of Jesus Christ, having a determination to serve him to the end, and truly manifest by their works that they have received of the Spirit of Christ unto the remission of their sins, shall be received by baptism into his church.

Enjoy,

Lehi

[ttribe]

BTW, Akboy, can you please go back to our posts to one another and actually answer ALL the questions I've posed to you; not just he ones you've selected? It's starting to look like you're hiding something.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I think that everybody should be able to get baptized.

Say you have two people, both God fearing and both have faith in God. If you looked at their lives they have fruit in their life equal to each other. One is baptized and the other is not, do you think that one should go to heaven and the other should go to hell, if all else is equal?

Ok I asked if you thought that there was one person taht is not able to not be baptised?

AS to your question, If one did not accept baptism in this life or the next then they didnt enter in at the gate. The biggest thing that I see here is that if someone were a believer they would get baptised. IOW if they didnt get bapstised then they werent really a believer in the first place.

Unfortunatly, and I wish that the bible stated this to eliminate confusion, that it would have said that baptism is essential. I know the bible doesnt put it in simplistic terms like this.

So if you say then that it is a work and earning salvation, tell me, how is that really any diffrent then 2 people living that "If you looked at their lives they have fruit in their life equal to each other. One is confess Jesus and the other did not, do you think that one should go to heaven and the other should go to hell, if all else is equal?"

[LeSellers]

How did the author of that book know Christ's followers were called 'Christians?' I thought the term was originally a derogatory term coined by critics of the early church. How would this author know about that?

It was in the Book of Mormon, too.

13b so long as there should a band of Christians remain to possess the land— 14 For thus were all the true believers of Christ, who belonged to the church of God, called by those who did not belong to the church.

There is no originality in hell.

Lehi