What does it mean to you to be a Mormon?

[Cairbre]

I would put it all are favoured by God by how they are obedient to the laws of God which they are aware of (their level of commitment to what they understand to be God's Will) as well as their faith in Christ.

You have stated it in terms I can accept.

[zerinus]

I don't think I miss read your post. You said:

The word you used was "truest". So there must be degrees of Christianity which are less true than the "truest". Would you not agree with the logic?

My apologies if my meaning was not clear. But I did clarify it in the first paragraph of my second post. Hope that is now quite clear.

I believe God values commitment less than he values obedience. And again there are varying degrees of obedience.

I equate commitment with obedience. Without obedience there is no genuine commitment.

If you want to believe that as a Mormon/Christian you are on top, that is up to you and between you and God, not between you and me. Go take your place in front of the line.

Sorry, I didn't understand the purpose of that. I was merely replying to your questions. If my answer did not address your question, please explain, and I will try to do better.

I have confessed to understanding the claims which came through the restoration your church is based on. I am not arguing with them.

Again, I was merely answering your questions. I don't know what you are protesting about. Can you clarify? Your motives puzzle me.

You end by reasserting that the LDS church is unique because of the priesthood. So you are describing one degree of Christianity with the priesthood and another degree of Christianity without it.

No, and I don't know how you came to that conclusion from what I said.

[Calm]

So as a Catholic you accept Mormons as Christians. But does the Catholic Church accept them as Christians?

The Catholic Church does not accept the LDS baptism as it does accept some other Christian faiths' baptism. This is because they believe our understanding of the Trinity---three distinct beings, united in purpose but not in essence or form---is fundamentally different from what they believe is the true understanding (and a Catholic can correct me if I am wrong please). I have heard some claim this means we are not considered Christians in that we are not part of the body of Christ, even a heretical part, but other Catholics have said this does not prevent us from being Christians. I have not been able to find an official source that is clear on this point.

I previously asked if Mormons recognize the prophet Mohammad as a true prophet. Could you answer that? What has the LDS church said on this matter?

You might find this comparison between Islam and the LDS faith helpful: http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=9f4c307e3584b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

Also:

Why does the Church grow and flourish? It does so because of divine direction to the leaders and members. This began in our day when God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to Joseph Smith early in the spring of 1820. However, we claim that God

[Calm]

Sociology, history, theology, mathematics, astronomy, geography, and I wish I could have learned more chemistry.

I was thinking more in terms of Christianity and the LDS faith in particular.

[Markk]

I don't think I miss read your post. You said:

The word you used was "truest". So there must be degrees of Christianity which are less true than the "truest". Would you not agree with the logic?

I believe God values commitment less than he values obedience. And again there are varying degrees of obedience.

If you want to believe that as a Mormon/Christian you are on top, that is up to you and between you and God, not between you and me. Go take your place in front of the line.

I have confessed to understanding the claims which came through the restoration your church is based on. I am not arguing with them.

You end by reasserting that the LDS church is unique because of the priesthood. So you are describing one degree of Christianity with the priesthood and another degree of Christianity without it.

Hi Cairbre,

Just to help you out, Mormonism more or less demands that the term "Christian" is a very generic word, it can encompass a wide range of people and "churches". A example is the "Children of God", which is a sect that claims to be Christian and have the true church but teach and believe that it is okay to have sex with children and in some cases there own. Many LDS members here have however reluctantly upheld this group as being Christian. It is a necessary circular argument for the LDS faith for many reasons, in one breath they are the only true Christian Church, have the only authority to act in Gods name, only through their system of beliefs can one be truly saved, yet many will still claim that basically anybody else that claims to be a Christian...is a Christian. You need to understand that Mormonism is a evolving faith that will and can change depending on keeping the cohesiveness of the Saints in tack, it's history shows many examples of how at all means "the Church" will survive, even if it means changing their doctrines or practices.

Mark

[Calm]

Hi Cairbre,

Just to help you out, Mormonism more or less demands that the term "Christian" is a very generic word, it can encompass a wide range of people and "churches". A example is the "Children of God", which is a sect that claims to be Christian and have the true church but teach and believe that it is okay to have sex with children and in some cases there own. Many LDS members here have however reluctantly upheld this group as being Christian. It is a necessary circular argument for the LDS faith for many reasons, in one breath they are the only true Christian Church, have the only authority to act in Gods name, only through their system of beliefs can one be truly saved, yet many will still claim that basically anybody else that claims to be a Christian...is a Christian.

And that is because LDS use the dictionary definitions of Christian rather than creating their own for polemic purposes.

You need to understand that Mormonism is a evolving faith that will and can change depending on keeping the cohesiveness of the Saints in tack, it's history shows many examples of how at all means "the Church" will survive, even if it means changing their doctrines or practices.

Actually Cairbre needs to understand that you have demonstrated a basic lack of understanding of the LDS faith in the past. Continuing revelation will of course require change. LDS do not see the changes as "fundamental" but rather as "refinement" or "clarification" based on the line upon line teachings.

If God commands...even if that is change, we obey.

We do not insist that the traditions of Man, even good traditions, have more value than the Will of God.

[Cairbre]

I'm not saying appeasing God is a bad thing, it's not really my point. What your missing is that appeasing God and obedience to Him is a heart thing, not a action thing. In other words as a Christian I believe that God saved me simply because in my heart (mind set) I asked Him too, and He saved me because He loves me, there is nothing I could do to appease a all knowing all powerful God who does not need anything. That said obedience is important, but I am obedient because I want to, not because I am required to as a means to an end. After all this, I still fall short and it is a Biblical teaching that as a sinner, one who falls short every minute of everyday, I am clothed not in my righteousness, but clothed in the righteousness of Christ. Paul says we are dung and filthy rags in our sinful state, but being clothed in the righteousness of Christ we are pure and sinless in God eyes because Christ is sinless.

What MUST you do to be saved? Is there a list similar to Mormonism,s list.

Sure, God Loves you, we just have a different God which leads to my question. Muslims, Mormons, and Christians all have different Gods, so how as people do you know which is the true God, each respective "religions" are opposed to each other in our beliefs.

Whats is the basis for your faith and what is the final court of arbitration in testing your faith...i.e feelings, scripture, the way we were raised and family pressures?

Mark

You have set my head spinning for the way you say things.

It sounds like you are saying deeds do not matter. I do not believe that.

You say, God saved you because you asked him to save you. Fine believe what you will. I'm not hear to debate your salvation.

You say, "What MUST you do to be saved?". Saved from what? I repent and ask God for forgiveness and to show mercy on me that I might me spared his wrath and punishment.

You say, we have a different God. I say we have the same God because there is only one God.

Different religions does not translate into different Gods.

My faith will be judged by God.

[flameburns623]

So as a Catholic you accept Mormons as Christians. But does the Catholic Church accept them as Christians?

And are Protestants still considered heretics by the Catholic church?

The RCC has a full-time department of the Vatican dedicated to the reunification of Christians, and tries to steer away from the epithet 'heretic'. The Church seeks dialogue, not shouting matches or name-calling, where this is possible.

I think that any responsible representative of the RCC or of the Vatican would agree with the distinctions I made earlier: Mormons are legitimately understood to be within the broad definition of a 'Christian' movement.

However, the RCC clearly feels that the LDS Church strays so far away from mainstream Christian dogma that, for example, the RCC does not see LDS baptism as valid. Any person whose only previous baptism was in the LDS Church would have to be rebaptised if they happened to convert to Catholicism. (By contrast, a person baptised as a Methodist or Lutheran, for example would not have to be rebaptised. And in general, most Protestants accept one anothers' baptism as well, with some rare exceptions). This is because the RCC feels in it's judgement that the 'intent' or 'purpose' of Mormon baptism is too radically different from the normative Christian intent of the sacrament.

Those issues get complex and I'm not going to resolve them here. Suffice it to say that the RCC apparently feels that at some basic level, the LDS Church clearly is not sufficiently Christian in it's theology to form the appropriate intention to baptise as Christians in other sects intend to do.

By the way: Mormons don't accept Catholic baptism, either: one much be rebaptised to join the LDS Church. So I think both groups recognize some significant differences between LDS theology and the theologies of other Christian movements/denominations/sects.

[Cairbre]

The Gospel of Jesus Christ is eternal. His priesthood power and authority are eternal. The same gospel and the same priesthood have been operational in every dispensation where the authorized servants of God (prophets) are on earth. Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Isaiah (and all the greater and lesser prophets of the Old Testament), Jesus Christ, Peter, James, and John, and Joseph Smith - all taught the same Gospel; all had the same priesthood. So does Thomas Monson have the same priesthood and teach the same Gospel. Mohammed didn't have the priesthood and didn't teach the Gospel. That's the difference. That does not mean that he did not teach good things and do good things.

You have left Mohammad as the odd man out. And you have limited the Good News to things non-Islamic. But much good has been done in God's name because of the prophet Mohammad and those that have turned to God through Islam.

Does good come from any other source than God?

Instead of casting out the good, shouldn't you try to incorporate it into the greater volume of work God has left us?

[Calm]

By the way: Mormons don't accept Catholic baptism, either: one much be rebaptised to join the LDS Church. So I think both groups recognize some significant differences between LDS theology and the theologies of other Christian movements/denominations/sects.

Most definitely.

However, even if the RCC were to adopt the exact doctrines as taught by the LDS faith, we still wouldn't accept your baptism.

We consider baptisms to be valid only if they are done by someone with the correct authority, after all. A devout Mormon could baptize someone into the faith using the correct form and understanding and we wouldn't accept it if that Saint wasn't authorized to do so (for example, did not have the correct Priesthood....). We're big time nitpickers in that respect.

[Cairbre]

My apologies if my meaning was not clear. But I did clarify it in the first paragraph of my second post. Hope that is now quite clear.

I equate commitment with obedience. Without obedience there is no genuine commitment.

Sorry, I didn't understand the purpose of that. I was merely replying to your questions. If my answer did not address your question, please explain, and I will try to do better.

Again, I was merely answering your questions. I don't know what you are protesting about. Can you clarify? Your motives puzzle me.

No, and I don't know how you came to that conclusion from what I said.

You protested my use of the expression "degrees of Christianity". That is what I am addressing. You have placed Mormons above other Christians by claiming Mormons are the truest form of Christianity. So why deny that you have described a Christianity that has levels or tiers? In other words, a Christianity with degrees of understanding, degrees of commitment, degrees of obedience, and degrees of reward and punishment.

[Calm]

You have left Mohammad as the odd man out. And you have limited the Good News to things non-Islamic. But much good has been done in God's name because of the prophet Mohammad and those that have turned to God through Islam.

Does good come from any other source than God?

Instead of casting out the good, shouldn't you try to incorporate it into the greater volume of work God has left us?

There is a quote from President Hinckley (IIRC) that I cannot find, perhaps someone with a better recall of exactly how he said it, that invites all to come to learn of our Gospel by first bringing with them the good or truth that they already know.

We do not believe that only the LDS faith has the Gospel, rather we are the ones that have access to the full Gospel and its authority. Those truths that we share in common plus those truths that are not specific to the Gospel but still increase man's understanding of nature, of mankind and how we should relate to each other, of even God are truths we want to know, share and experience with all.

[Calm]

Does good come from any other source than God?

From the Book of Mormon:

11 But he that believeth these things which I have spoken, him will I visit with the manifestations of my Spirit, and he shall know and bear record. For because of my Spirit he shall know that these things are true; for it persuadeth men to do good.

12 And whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do good is of me; for good cometh of none save it be of me. I am the same that leadeth men to all good; he that will not believe my words will not believe me

[Markk]

You have set my head spinning for the way you say things.

It sounds like you are saying deeds do not matter. I do not believe that.

You say, God saved you because you asked him to save you. Fine believe what you will. I'm not hear to debate your salvation.

You say, "What MUST you do to be saved?". Saved from what? I repent and ask God for forgiveness and to show mercy on me that I might me spared his wrath and punishment.

You say, we have a different God. I say

we have the same God because there is only one God.

Different religions does not translate into different Gods.

My faith will be judged by God.

If your head is spinning I suppose that is a good thing if you choose to try to understand what Christian believe. In a nut shell this is called Grace, in term you may understand Grace is His mercy given freely to those who ask.

Let me give a great example...There was a man who hold his son that if he mowed the lawn and did a good job that he would take him to a baseball game, the son did, so he earned a trip to the ball park. This is an example of man reaching and trying to earn their salvation.

On the other hand... There was father who came home from work, grabbed his son and took him to the ball game simply because he loved his son and wanted too. The next day the father came home from work and the lawn was mowed and everything was in order, and when the father asked why he did it, the son said because I love you.

In other words both these contain works, but one is for a means to an end,the other out of love from the heart.

You say, "What MUST you do to be saved?". Saved from what? I repent and ask God for forgiveness and to show mercy on me that I might me spared his wrath and punishment.

You answered your own question, saved from wrath and punishment! I must accept His free gift of Grace He offer to all who want it, but you have to want it and accept it. It is accepted through a receiving belief in Jesus Christ.

You say, we have a different God. I say we have the same God because there is only one God.

Different religions does not translate into different Gods. My faith will be judged by God.

I disagree, I certainly agree that here is one God, but I disagree that every religion have the same God. I think I have a Koran somewhere, what cf could you give me to try to understand your view better.

Anyway you still haven't answered my question, give it a try?

Mark

[Calm]

You protested my use of the expression "degrees of Christianity". That is what I am addressing. You have placed Mormons above other Christians by claiming Mormons are the truest form of Christianity. So why deny that you have described a Christianity that has levels or tiers? In other words, a Christianity with degrees of understanding, degrees of commitment, degrees of obedience, and degrees of reward and punishment.

I would not say "Mormons are the truest form" because not all Mormons are devout or righteous. The LDS faith is the fullest Gospel, the only one with the priesthood authority, yes...but LDS are also generally when looking at their fellowmen including fellowmembers more concerned with orthopraxy than orthodoxy. A truly good man no matter what his beliefs are will be seen by most LDS as more "Christian" (meaning more Christlike) and further on the road to exaltation than an LDS who is selfish or lacks in obedience.

I would say that the use of "degrees of understanding would be workable depending on how it's used though that would be hard to determine. However, since the sects vary so much in understanding (at least to LDS eyes) it would be hard to quantify this as some would be closer to understanding in one area than other sects while further away from the truth in other ways.

Degrees of commitment can vary too much by individual, one can have a very uncommitted LDS and a very committed Catholic for example.

Not sure about degrees of reward and punishment due to the LDS belief that all will be taught at some time whether in this life or the next so eternally speaking there is no difference in the opportunity to receive, just in what someone is willing to accept from the Lord (one must accept the responsibility for use of a blessing along with the blessing and not all care to do so).

PS: I have to go to work now, will be interested to see how the conversation has gone when I come back to it later.

[mfbukowski]

You have left Mohammad as the odd man out. And you have limited the Good News to things non-Islamic. But much good has been done in God's name because of the prophet Mohammad and those that have turned to God through Islam.

Does good come from any other source than God?

Instead of casting out the good, shouldn't you try to incorporate it into the greater volume of work God has left us?

I am LDS and agree fully that much good has been done in God's name because of the prophet Mohammad and those who have turned to God through Islam.

I believe that God leads us by his spirit to the best path we have available to us to bring us closer to him, and that all religions have truth, some more than others.

Much evil has also been done in the name of Christianity as well as Islam. Do you think any evil has been done by Islam? Is conversion by force a good thing?

Does evil come from any other source than the devil?

[zerinus]

You protested my use of the expression "degrees of Christianity". That is what I am addressing.

And in my second post I explained to you what I had meant by that. I explained that what I meant was degree of commitment (obedience if you like) to Christ; not that there are "degrees of Christianity". Can you tell me what was unclear about that explanation? I will try to explain it better if I can.

You have placed Mormons above other Christians by claiming Mormons are the truest form of Christianity.

And I clarified that by affirming that Mormonism is the only true Church of God in the world today, and explained why. Again, can you tell me what was unclear about what I had said?

So why deny that you have described a Christianity that has levels or tiers?

I don't believe that I did. Perhaps you are not interested in a serious discussion, and that is your excuse.

In other words, a Christianity with degrees of understanding, degrees of commitment, degrees of obedience, and degrees of reward and punishment.

Let me try one more time. I believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is God's only true Church in the world today. Other Christian churches are incomplete because they don't have the fullness of the truth or the priesthood authority that the LDS Church has. But to the extent that their members have genuine commitment to Christ, and wish to live by His commandments, they are accepted by Him. Is that any clearer do you think?

[handys003]

I have over estimated you as well...Lucifer's angels are not messengers from God.

They can pose a s messengers from God such as Gabriel.

I suspect your are not Muslim but an alter. Your writing style indicates such and I have yet to read any citations from the Koran. Heck even Daniel Peterson who is LDS uses the Koran for discussion in the defense of Islam. I know it's you redwave.

[Koneko]

Hi Cairbre,

First let me tell you, I have enjoyed this thread, and the respectful tone you have brought with you in discussing the differences and similarities between Christian faiths, as well as Islamic. I am a Mormon convert myself, but I agree with you that much good has been done in God's name because of Mohammad and Islam. We are taught that there is truth in many religions and many texts (perhaps you can consider that one major difference between Mormon's and other Christians). Is there anything precluding Mohammad from being a Prophet of God? Frankly, I believe we just don't have a certain answer for that. Although, I understand that you believe to have knowledge of that matter. It is not a knowledge that I share or personally agree with your findings on. That's not to say it couldn't be truthful, but I have had no confirmation or denial from the Holy Spirit on that matter myself. Then again, I do not know that I have really inquired directly on it, although I have wondered it before. I will say that Joseph Smith was a very good and holy person even before the Gospel was restored to the earth. Was he considered a Prophet before the authority and priesthood were restored? Perhaps another more knowledgeable Mormon can answer that for me. I guess what I am getting at, is that there are many people who have had personal revelations, and even been strong spiritual leaders and who have a personal relationship with God. Do you believe that one must be a Prophet in order for his teaching to have value? I don't. I witness the strong examples of many "spiritual leaders" in my ward and community continually. Prophets have the authority to speak for God...that does not mean they have a monopoly on receiving personal revelation, instruction and guidance from our Heavenly Father. I am certain that someone like yourself or like Mohammad will accept the truth and act obediently to whatever God desires of him, and will be rewarded in kind. For that reason, I do not worry overly much for your eternal salvation. Rather I believe your mortal and eternal life would be improved by a knowledge of Gospel - or in other words, what we as Mormons know to be true.

As to what is Christian - it depends much on who is defining it. Personally I could care less what other faiths consider us, it matters more what I consider myself. Christian to me means to understand and accept the atonement of Jesus Christ and to strive to live by the teaching and examples he put forth in as much as they understand them. I think there are many that fit under that umbrella. The label matters much less than the fruits and actions. There are some who consider themselves Catholic, or Mormon, etc. who do not act as such. An orange and an apple are both fruit, even though an orange isn't an apple and an apple isn't an orange.

[volgadon]

Sociology, history, theology, mathematics, astronomy, geography, and I wish I could have learned more chemistry.

What have you studied about the LDS.

[Cairbre]

Some differences between LDS Christians and most historical Christian sects (my response is in italics and bolded):

1 We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost. We believe that God the Father has a physical body as well as a spiritual body in the same way that Christ does; the Holy Ghost at this time still only possesses a spiritual body, but will in the future when his mission is complete receive a physical body as well.

2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam

[Cairbre]

I was thinking more in terms of Christianity and the LDS faith in particular.

My ears are always open and my mind is always wanting.

[Cairbre]

Hi Cairbre,

Just to help you out, Mormonism more or less demands that the term "Christian" is a very generic word, it can encompass a wide range of people and "churches". A example is the "Children of God", which is a sect that claims to be Christian and have the true church but teach and believe that it is okay to have sex with children and in some cases there own. Many LDS members here have however reluctantly upheld this group as being Christian. It is a necessary circular argument for the LDS faith for many reasons, in one breath they are the only true Christian Church, have the only authority to act in Gods name, only through their system of beliefs can one be truly saved, yet many will still claim that basically anybody else that claims to be a Christian...is a Christian. You need to understand that Mormonism is a evolving faith that will and can change depending on keeping the cohesiveness of the Saints in tack, it's history shows many examples of how at all means "the Church" will survive, even if it means changing their doctrines or practices.

Mark

I don't see how God would mistake pedophiles for being Christians. It seems to me God would know them only as sinners.

Are you sure the LDS church sees this sect as Christian? Could you provide some references in the form of LDS quotations to support such a claim?

[Cairbre]

And that is because LDS use the dictionary definitions of Christian rather than creating their own for polemic purposes.

Actually Cairbre needs to understand that you have demonstrated a basic lack of understanding of the LDS faith in the past. Continuing revelation will of course require change. LDS do not see the changes as "fundamental" but rather as "refinement" or "clarification" based on the line upon line teachings.

If God commands...even if that is change, we obey.

We do not insist that the traditions of Man, even good traditions, have more value than the Will of God.

Thank you. I sort of sensed Markk's self-projecting agenda in his posts. No harm done.

[Cairbre]

The RCC has a full-time department of the Vatican dedicated to the reunification of Christians, and tries to steer away from the epithet 'heretic'. The Church seeks dialogue, not shouting matches or name-calling, where this is possible.

I think that any responsible representative of the RCC or of the Vatican would agree with the distinctions I made earlier: Mormons are legitimately understood to be within the broad definition of a 'Christian' movement.

However, the RCC clearly feels that the LDS Church strays so far away from mainstream Christian dogma that, for example, the RCC does not see LDS baptism as valid. Any person whose only previous baptism was in the LDS Church would have to be rebaptised if they happened to convert to Catholicism. (By contrast, a person baptised as a Methodist or Lutheran, for example would not have to be rebaptised. And in general, most Protestants accept one anothers' baptism as well, with some rare exceptions). This is because the RCC feels in it's judgement that the 'intent' or 'purpose' of Mormon baptism is too radically different from the normative Christian intent of the sacrament.

Those issues get complex and I'm not going to resolve them here. Suffice it to say that the RCC apparently feels that at some basic level, the LDS Church clearly is not sufficiently Christian in it's theology to form the appropriate intention to baptise as Christians in other sects intend to do.

By the way: Mormons don't accept Catholic baptism, either: one much be rebaptised to join the LDS Church. So I think both groups recognize some significant differences between LDS theology and the theologies of other Christian movements/denominations/sects.

I guess I would have to ask you what is so radically different in a Mormon baptism and what is "the normative Christian intent of the sacrament" as defined by the RCC?