Are Mormons Christian: Continue The Discussion

[Rob Bowman]

shalamabobbi,

You wrote:

"growing faster" is the mathematical equivalent of "rate of change" or the derivative with respect to time.

We can get an average for this with the LDS faith in going from essentially zip to our current numbers in about 180 years and then compare that to evagelism if you have some similar figures to calculate an average rate of growth from.

The beginnings of anything that might be identified as or equated with evangelicalism would be in the early sixteenth century, less than 500 years ago, in the Protestant Reformation. Evangelicalism is essentially that segment of Protestantism that holds to the same basic doctrines that were articulated in the Reformation. So from that perspective evangelicalism went from zero to over 600 million in a little less than 500 years.

Another comparison that we might make is between Mormonism and the evangelical forms of Pentecostalism. Mormonism began about 180 years ago and now numbers no more than 14 million. Pentecostalism began 106 years ago and now numbers about 275 million; I don't know exactly how many of these are also evangelical but I'm sure it's at least 100 million.

You wrote:

Not that it is significant of anything. We might also compare the relative numbers of students who get C's with those who get A's. Or the number of Olympic world record holders with those who don't exercise on a regular basis.

I'm not using the numbers to prove anything. I'm simply responding to the claim that the numbers for Mormonism are significantly better than for evangelicalism.

You wrote:

And we might take into consideration what it takes to be counted an evangelical - parrot a few words about Jesus and you're in! And check your brain at the door where it comes to any sort of rational thinking about geology..

Isn't ignorance bliss.

[Rob Bowman]

Bart,

You asked:

I'm just curious -- how do you view the Oneness Pentecostals? They are definitely not Trinitarians. Which is closer to traditional Christianity -- a Tritheist or a Oneness Pentecostal?

Both are heretical forms of Christianity. Oneness Pentecostalism is in some significant ways closer to orthodox Christianity than Mormonism. The problems from an orthodox point of view with Mormon theology run much deeper than the bare word tritheism alone might suggest. The traditional LDS view that God was once a mortal man who progressed to Godhood and that we are beings of his same species with the same potential is as far afield from orthodox Christian theology as any religious movement that self-identifies as Christian gets.

[shalamabobbi]

I think that's an unfair stereotype ... I know too many faithful evangelicals to accept that idea. The ones I know may not feel works are necessary for salvation, but they sure seem to be good at living a moral life and helping their fellow humans. I live in what would best be described as the Bible Belt North -- I see a lot of good work being done by the faithful Christians of all denominations in my area.

I didn't mean to characterize any particular/individual person(s) but there is a far cry difference between the requirements of the evangelical system of salvation and the LDS system where faithful members are under covenant to dedicate their all.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Rob Bowman...I asked for a CFR on the 300 to 400 million Christians, that is quite a spread. CFR's are required to be answered.

[shalamabobbi]

The beginnings of anything that might be identified as or equated with evangelicalism would be in the early sixteenth century, less than 500 years ago, in the Protestant Reformation. Evangelicalism is essentially that segment of Protestantism that holds to the same basic doctrines that were articulated in the Reformation. So from that perspective evangelicalism went from zero to over 600 million in a little less than 500 years.

Another comparison that we might make is between Mormonism and the evangelical forms of Pentecostalism. Mormonism began about 180 years ago and now numbers no more than 14 million. Pentecostalism began 106 years ago and now numbers about 275 million; I don't know exactly how many of these are also evangelical but I'm sure it's at least 100 million.

I had occasion to visit a pentecostal service while on my mission in Argentina. Pretty shocking experience. If you are happy to include that religion under your tent, weelll, Ok then..

And here a comparison with the different growth rates between dandelions and orchids and the attendant care that each requires might be in order.

Isn't ignorance bliss.

Are you suggesting that contrary to my awareness EVs now broadly accept the science of geology? Or are you suggesting that current geologists are misinterpreting the data?

If the latter see the first two sentences of this reply above..

Otherwise ignorance is bliss in the same way lack of physical exercise is bliss..

In the words of one stand up comic, "no pain, NO PAIN.."

Edited September 6, 2012 by shalamabobbi

[wenglund]

Perhaps my definition could be amended to say that a Mormon is anyone who affirms the Book of Mormon to be a scriptural revelation about God and Jesus and who self-identifies as a Mormon.

Consistency, then, would demand that you amend your definition of "Christian" to: anyone [or group] who affirms the New Testament to be a scriptural revelation about God and Jesus and who self-identify as a Christian. Right?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited September 7, 2012 by wenglund

[zerinus]

I agree that atheists are unlikely to attach the label "non-Christian" to Mormons, but then, I don't think that's the most helpful term either, even from my staunch evangelical perspective. Again, for the umpteenth time, there are familiar senses of the word Christian that I agree apply to Mormons.

And I think there are also familiar senses in which Evangelicals can be called Apostate Christians, church of the devil, great and abominable church etc.

Edited September 6, 2012 by zerinus

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

And I think there are also familiar senses in which Evangelicals can be called Apostate Christians, church of the devil, great and abominable church etc.

Harsh...there are many good Christians whom according to LDS beliefs "know not where to find the truth...assuming there is truth.

[Rob Bowman]

Pa Pa,

You wrote:

Rob Bowman...I asked for a CFR on the 300 to 400 million Christians, that is quite a spread. CFR's are required to be answered.

I did answer, right here.

[Rob Bowman]

shalamabobbi,

You wrote:

I had occasion to visit a pentecostal service while on my mission in Argentina. Pretty shocking experience. If you are happy to include that religion under your tent, weelll, Ok then..

Please pay attention. I estimated that half or less of Pentecostals are evangelicals. If what you saw was "shocking" it isn't likely to be "under my tent."

You wrote:

And here a comparison with the different growth rates between dandelions and orchids and the attendant care that each requires might be in order.

I'm so glad you Mormons are not judgmental and do not make critical generalizations about other people's faiths.

You wrote:

Are you suggesting that contrary to my awareness EVs now broadly accept the science of geology? Or are you suggesting that current geologists are misinterpreting the data?

You made two grossly unfair generalizations about evangelicals. (By the way, evangelicals do not refer to themselves as "EVs" and this is not a standard acronym in any body of literature, unlike "LDS" for Latter-day Saints.) The first was that "what it takes to be counted an evangelical - parrot a few words about Jesus and you're in." That is a flat-out misrepresentation of evangelicalism. The second was your sweeping generalization about evangelicals and geology. It is true that many evangelicals are young-earth creationists and embrace some form of "flood geology," and of course the dominant understanding of geology regards that view as scientifically untenable. However, those who hold this view do not agree with the notion of "checking their brains at the door" or dispensing with "rational thinking" in this subject area. On the other hand, many evangelicals accept an old earth, reject flood geology, and accept the standard views within geology about the history of the earth. I don't know if there are any statistics regarding which way of thinking is now the majority view among evangelicals; if I had to guess I'd guess it's close to 50-50 in the United States and that only a minority of evangelicals outside the United States are young-earth creationists. But in any case your statement was an unfair caricature and overgeneralization.

Edited September 6, 2012 by Rob Bowman

[Rob Bowman]

Wade,

Fascinating. The man claims to be a Southern Baptist minister. However, I doubt he is currently pastoring a SBC church. The material you linked also reports that he did convert to Mormonism and join the LDS Church (though he later left), and he even refers to himself as Mormon. It sounds to me like he's best described as a maverick.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Pa Pa,

You wrote:

I did answer, right here.

Thank you...does this mean you only believe EV's are Christian? Also since every EV Church is independant how were these numbers calculated? What about Catholics, do they count? Another point...the Church I grew was a small Baptist Church was surly never asked for their numbers. There is no monolithic EV org...so how do they keep count? Also what of many Churches who now ordain homosexuals and condone same sex marriage, are they still EV's. Most EV's are now Calvinist...what of those who believe anyone can come to Christ? We know how many members we have because we are commanded too. Also EV's do not own the definition of the word Christian, no more than we do.

[zerinus]

Harsh...there are many good Christians whom according to LDS beliefs "know not where to find the truth...assuming there is truth.

I wasn't talking about "good Christians," I was talking about the Evangelicals!

[wenglund]

Wade,

Fascinating. The man claims to be a Southern Baptist minister. However, I doubt he is currently pastoring a SBC church. The material you linked also reports that he did convert to Mormonism and join the LDS Church (though he later left), and he even refers to himself as Mormon. It sounds to me like he's best described as a maverick.

Call him whatever you wish. My point still stands.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Rob Bowman]

Pa Pa,

You wrote:

Thank you...does this mean you only believe EV's are Christian?

No.

Also since every EV Church is independant how were these numbers calculated?

Not true. Most evangelical churches are not independent congregations.

What about Catholics, do they count?

As evangelicals, no.

Another point...the Church I grew was a small Baptist Church was surly never asked for their numbers. There is no monolithic EV org...so how do they keep count?

Numbers for adherents of most religions are estimates based on various ways of gathering relevant data. This may include the number of churches in a denomination, estimates of average congregational size, surveys of the general population asking people what denomination or religion if any they consider their own, etc.

Also what of many Churches who now ordain homosexuals and condone same sex marriage, are they still EV's.

No. The denominations where these things are happening are the more liberal mainline denominations in which evangelicals are a minority at best. A minority of people self-identifying as evangelicals do favor allowing same-sex couples to marry as a legal issue but do not regard such unions as in agreement with their own religious and moral values.

Most EV's are now Calvinist...

Not true. Not even close to being true.

...what of those who believe anyone can come to Christ?

Without getting into your inadequate understanding of Calvinist soteriology, most Calvinists think that non-Calvinists can be Christians.

We know how many members we have because we are commanded too.

That's fine. Now if only your scrupulous concern for knowing how many members you have extended to subtracting those who have already left.

Also EV's do not own the definition of the word Christian, no more than we do.

I don't think evangelicals own the definition. I have stated repeatedly in this very thread that I don't even think that there is only one correct definition. So far, only one Mormon in the thread seems to have gotten this point.

[altersteve]

I wasn't talking about "good Christians," I was talking about the Evangelicals!

Uncalled for.

[shalamabobbi]

shalamabobbi,

You wrote:

Please pay attention. I estimated that half or less of Pentecostals are evangelicals. If what you saw was "shocking" it isn't likely to be "under my tent."

You wrote:

I'm so glad you Mormons are not judgmental and do not make critical generalizations about other people's faiths.

You wrote:

You made two grossly unfair generalizations about evangelicals. (By the way, evangelicals do not refer to themselves as "EVs" and this is not a standard acronym in any body of literature, unlike "LDS" for Latter-day Saints.) The first was that "what it takes to be counted an evangelical - parrot a few words about Jesus and you're in." That is a flat-out misrepresentation of evangelicalism. The second was your sweeping generalization about evangelicals and geology. It is true that many evangelicals are young-earth creationists and embrace some form of "flood geology," and of course the dominant understanding of geology regards that view as scientifically tenable. However, those who hold this view do not agree with the notion of "checking their brains at the door" or dispensing with "rational thinking" in this subject area. On the other hand, many evangelicals accept an old earth, reject flood geology, and accept the standard views within geology about the history of the earth. I don't know if there are any statistics regarding which way of thinking is now the majority view among evangelicals; if I had to guess I'd guess it's close to 50-50 in the United States and that only a minority of evangelicals outside the United States are young-earth creationists. But in any case your statement was an unfair caricature and overgeneralization.

That was my observation based upon attending a Billy Graham crusade in my youth. Other than answering the pulpit call I didn't see much difference in the lives of my friends after participating in that life changing "event".

How else can I characterize a religious movement other than by what I see of it in action?

BTW, that's "scientifically untenable" not "tenable".

Before you posted that the LDS are so far "off the mark" that you believed our religion incapable of establishing personal salvific relationships with the Savior. I might guess this has to do with the emphasis upon good works? If so, how do you establish this false dichotomy between good works and humble dependence upon the Lord in view of the writings of James? (Show me your faith w/o your works and I'll show you my faith by my works). How do good works show any disrespect for the Savior's atonement in your view?

Might be nice if your concern for "unfair caricatures and overgeneralization" extended to yourself as well..

[cassieblanca]

I want to actually talk about Mormanism Vs christianity and what i see as a major difference between them. Are any Mormons up for the task?!

I just joined this site today and I have only read a little bit on here, so I am sadly out of the loop. I will try to get a little caught up with what has been said. but I am LDS and I am up for the task if there's still anything you want to talk about. I am interested in the faith/works/grace issue and I understand there is always confusion between religions on that point. Just fyi we do not believe we are saved by works but I know that all LDS aren't always really good at explaining or sometimes even understanding all that...

[mfbukowski]

Oh, good, we're going to use reason. Cool. In your opinion, what other option is there besides agreeing, or disagreeing, with a particular definition of a word? Can you agree and disagree with it at the same time? Or are both definitions okay?

You definitely need to read some Wittgenstein.

Duck or rabbit?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ab/Kaninchen_und_Ente.png/250px-Kaninchen_und_Ente.png

Edited September 6, 2012 by mfbukowski

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I wasn't talking about "good Christians," I was talking about the Evangelicals!

Oh My!

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I just joined this site today and I have only read a little bit on here, so I am sadly out of the loop. I will try to get a little caught up with what has been said. but I am LDS and I am up for the task if there's still anything you want to talk about. I am interested in the faith/works/grace issue and I understand there is always confusion between religions on that point. Just fyi we do not believe we are saved by works but I know that all LDS aren't always really good at explaining or sometimes even understanding all that...

Welcome

[shalamabobbi]

You definitely need to read some Wittgenstein.

Duck or rabbit?

http://upload.wikime...en_und_Ente.png

I'm going with duck since the ears are on top of one another rather than side by side(need a 90 degree rotation). But even with that the openings are facing inward rather than outward and both the duck and the rabbit seem to be missing their nostrils, so.. final choice... a clever deception by Satan! Cleave the monster in two and cleave unto the Savior oh all ye infidels!

I think the church lady will back me up here.

Rob is she in one of your congregations?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Pa Pa,

You wrote: Quote fuctuion is not working so I will answer on bold type...

No. IMHO "yes"

Not true. Most evangelical churches are not independent congregations.Yes they are...each pastor is chosen by that comgregation and only ansers to them.

As evangelicals, no. Bt Catholics are not it renders you denial moot.

Numbers for adherents of most religions are estimates based on various ways of gathering relevant data. This may include the number of churches in a denomination, estimates of average congregational size, surveys of the general population asking people what denomination or religion if any they consider their own, etc. Which means my comment about inepentance correct.

No. The denominations where these things are happening are the more liberal mainline denominations in which evangelicals are a minority at best. A minority of people self-identifying as evangelicals do favor allowing same-sex couples to marry as a legal issue but do not regard such unions as in agreement with their own religious and moral values. again makes my comment about independance corect.

Not true. Not even close to being true. I would say 99% of those who post on various sites suggest otherwise...this from 1,000's of posts. In fact I posted about an uncle who died a 4 hours old and was told that he wold at that age have commited all 7 deadly sins...because "all have come short of the glory of God"...even a 4 hour ol baby grasping for every breath.

Without getting into your inadequate understanding of Calvinist soteriology, most Calvinists think that non-Calvinists can be Christians.This might be true...but it shows a lace of unity in the faith.

That's fine. Now if only your scrupulous concern for knowing how many members you have extended to subtracting those who have already left. Those who truly leave and request their names be removed are not counted...unless you are accuse us or the Church of lying.

I don't think evangelicals own the definition. I have stated repeatedly in this very thread that I don't even think that there is only one correct definition. So far, only one Mormon in the thread seems to have gotten this point. I beg to differ...that has been the main point.

[JarMan]

Rob Bowman, why does it matter to you whether Mormons are Christians?

[shalamabobbi]

Rob Bowman, why does it matter to you whether Mormons are Christians?

He's concerned because he thinks that we are not sufficiently in touch with our Lord for salvation. Of course salvation centers in the atonement of Jesus and somehow this means that if we attempt(that is all we are capable of in his view) to be righteous we are placing our faith in something other than Jesus.

Jesus did say "many shall say unto me in that day, did we not prophesy in thy name, etc to which he'll reply depart from me all ye who work iniquity" so maybe Rob thinks that we should avoid bad works only, dunno.

The following is an attempt at a run-on sentence as they sometimes are found in the BOM. Critiques are welcome:

This whole movement of modern Christiandom around a misunderstanding of the words of Paul, taking them completely out of the context of what he was trying to accomplish (bringing the house of Israel and the converted gentiles to an understanding that the law of Moses had come to an end and there was no more need to engage in the works of the law (of Moses)) and misapply Paul's words to all works, including works of righteousness (a misunderstanding that Paul was quick to correct within his own epistles and Peter warned against) based upon a mechanistic blind adherence to the plain(or not so plain) meaning of the words (as mfbukowski tried to point out to no avail) of the text, is an example of the dark abyss into which modern thinkers about religion have plummeted.(The letter killeth but the spirit giveth life).

And then Rob wonders why no one here is interested in listening to what he has to say. Stumper eh Rob?

Edited September 7, 2012 by shalamabobbi