Are Mormons Christian: Continue The Discussion

[altersteve]

The argument is simple:

Premise 1: To follow Christ, one must obey his commands. (This premise was furnished by another Mormon in this thread.)

Premise 2: Christ's commands include that people are to be baptized, become members of his church, sustain the LDS prophet, perform LDS ordinances in the temple, etc. (From LDS doctrine.)

Premise 3: Non-Mormons are not baptized, are not members of Christ's church, do not sustain the prophet, do not perform LDS ordinances in the temple, etc. (Undisputed fact.)

Conclusion 1: Therefore, non-Mormons do not obey Christ's commands. (Follows deductively from premises 2 and 3).

Conclusion 2: Therefore, non-Mormons do not follow Christ. (Follows from premise 1 and conclusion 1).

That may be your conclusion, but ours is simply that non-Mormons do not have the fullness of the gospel. This does not mean they do not follow Christ to the best of their ability. They are following Him the best way they know how and we accept that.

[Zeta-Flux]

That may be your conclusion, but ours is simply that non-Mormons do not have the fullness of the gospel. This does not mean they do not follow Christ to the best of their ability. They are following Him the best way they know how and we accept that.

Not only that, but we similarly are following him the best way we know how, and admit that we have room to grow. :-)

[Rob Bowman]

Mr. Bukowski,

You wrote:

And why should anyone considering you have admitted your only purpose here is to find positions critical to our Faith?

Because the issue here is what evangelicals believe, and I am an evangelical theologian, that's why!

You wrote:

Note that the choices were to criticize with some information or criticize without any information- the thought to NOT criticize was not even an option.

Of course not criticizing Mormonism is an option for me. But you're missing my point, which had nothing to do with what options are open to me. My point was that if I do criticize Mormonism, you and other Mormons will condemn me for doing so whether or not I make an effort to research Mormonism accurately and listen to Mormons. If I as a critic ignore Mormon apologetic arguments and theological explanations, you'll attack me for not doing my homework. If I as a critic engage Mormon apologetic arguments and theological explanations, you'll attack me for doing this homework in order to sharpen my critiques (which is what you, Mr. Bukowski, have done repeatedly). That was my point.

[Rob Bowman]

Steve,

I have heard the Mormon "fullness of the gospel." I reject it. Am I following Christ to the best of my ability?

That may be your conclusion, but ours is simply that non-Mormons do not have the fullness of the gospel. This does not mean they do not follow Christ to the best of their ability. They are following Him the best way they know how and we accept that.

[volgadon]

Steve,

I have heard the Mormon "fullness of the gospel." I reject it. Am I following Christ to the best of my ability?

Not for us to say.

[Zakuska]

Steve,

I have heard the Mormon "fullness of the gospel." I reject it. Am I following Christ to the best of my ability?

Only God knows Rob. We aren't in the business of judging another mans servant.

Unlike Evangelicals... Mormons leave the Judging in Gods capable hands.

Romans 14

4 Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

...

10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

Evangelicals on the other hand pass judgment every day when they deny that others are even "Christian".

Edited September 5, 2012 by Zakuska

[MormonMason]

I like the Grace without works philosophy. How can it be a gift if first you must work for it.

...

Never mind the rewards and requirements for exaltation; just the fact that one is saved at all, in any degree of glory, is a gift. Jesus did for us what we could not do for ourselves. That is grace. But, it is not by grace alone that we are saved. Anyone who claims that does not know the scriptures. It is by grace through a living faith. This means grace (a free gift) + something else (faith, an action synergous with action (deeds)). A living faith is one that not only motivates works but is actively "working together with" works to bring about justification. It is not my definition; it is that of James in his Greek text. He uses the Greek word from which we obtain our English word synergy. But, what is a synergy? It is two or more things working together to bring about a result. It is an active, not a passive process.

Someone I know has an analogy for that involving a triangle. He likens salvation to a fire-triangle. In the fire triangle, a fire only burns if three things are present:

1. Fuel

2. Oxygen

3. Heat.

For salvation in the fullest sense that leads to justification and sanctification, we have:

1. Grace

2. Faith

3. Works.

In the first example, if either one of these is missing there cannot be fire. In the second example, if any one of these are missing there cannot be salvation. Grace, like oxygen, is freely available and is a free gift. If a man does works but has no faith there can be no salvation. If a man has faith but does not have the works to form a synergy with faith, there can be no salvation.

But, in all cases the grace is free and that gift makes salvation even possible at all. Thus, in a very real sense, salvation itself is a gift because even with all you do and believe you could never get anywhere without the grace.

That is how I understand the scriptures to teach as a whole and in full context. Or, as Hugh Nibley some years ago once lightly put it: "Work we must but the lunch is free."

[zerinus]

That's pretty funny, considering that you have judged my sincerity and refused to take my word on face value. I am referring to earlier posts in this thread in which you accused me repeatedly of deliberate obfuscation and the like.

Oh, to find even one Mormon on this forum who will actually listen to this evangelical!

Your excuses, doges, and duplicity is wearing thin. Nobody takes you seriously round here any more.

[MormonMason]

Steve,

I have heard the Mormon "fullness of the gospel." I reject it. Am I following Christ to the best of my ability?

If you fight against the fullness of the Gospel and against Zion, we don't have to judge. God will, and he will cast you into hell. God himself has said so. So long as you do not take an active part in fighting against Zion and the fullness of the Gospel, you will receive what you have merited and what you seek, namely, salvation in the presence of Christ forever. If you fight against the fullness of the Gospel and against Zion, you will go to hell and enter into the Telestial kingdom after the second resurrection.

LDS scripture including the Bible, all as a whole and taken together, are pretty clear about all that. But, we still leave judgment in the hands of God as to what you are or aren't doing to the best of your ability. That is between you and God. You alone will have to answer for what you have done in that day.

Edited September 5, 2012 by MormonMason

[zerinus]

Steve,

I have heard the Mormon "fullness of the gospel." I reject it. Am I following Christ to the best of my ability?

No, you are not following Him at all. No one can reject the message of the Restoration and be approved of the Lord:

D&C 68:

8 Go ye into all the world, preach the gospel to every creature, acting in the authority which I have given you, baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

9 And he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned.

D&C 84:

42 And wo unto all those who come not unto this priesthood which ye have received, which I now confirm upon you who are present this day, by mine own voice out of the heavens; and even I have given the heavenly hosts and mine angels charge concerning you.

74 Verily, verily, I say unto you, they who believe not on your words, and are not baptized in water in my name, for the remission of their sins, that they may receive the Holy Ghost, shall be damned, and shall not come into my Father’s kingdom where my Father and I am.

75 And this revelation unto you, and commandment, is in force from this very hour upon all the world, and the gospel is unto all who have not received it.

D&C 112:

28 But purify your hearts before me; and then go ye into all the world, and preach my gospel unto every creature who has not received it;

29 And he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, and he that believeth not, and is not baptized, shall be damned.

30 For unto you, the Twelve, and those, the First Presidency, who are appointed with you to be your counselors and your leaders, is the power of this priesthood given, for the last days and for the last time, in the which is the dispensation of the fulness of times.

Edited September 5, 2012 by zerinus

[MormonMason]

...I have not seen any quotations from you that contradict Conclusion 2. The quotations you provided do refer to non-Mormon believers in Christ as Christians, but they do not affirm that such people are genuine followers of Christ. Again, I am simply pointing out a problem that arises if one defines Christian as a follower of Christ. You don't have to accept that definition if you disagree with it.

...

Look no further than the Book of Mormon, Mr. Bowman:

11 Yea, they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted.

12 Because of pride, and because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up.

13 They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.

14 They wear stiff necks and high heads; yea, and because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and whoredoms, they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men.

(Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 28:11-14)

Apparently, even among the most corrupt of churches may be found "a few, who are the humble followers of Christ" who are in many instances led astray because of the precepts of men. They are still identified as "humble followers of Christ" in the Book of Mormon.

There are also interesting passages in the Doctrine and Covenants that speak to us similarly, if we will but listen.

[Robert F. Smith]

Your excuses, doges, and duplicity is wearing thin. Nobody takes you seriously round here any more.

Please zerinus. We can disagree without being disagreeable. I don't make ad hominem attacks on you when we disagree.

[volgadon]

Please zerinus. We can disagree without being disagreeable. I don't make ad hominem attacks on you when we disagree.

Well, Rob apparently has been sheltering duplicituous Doges. Perhaps from the Byzantines.

[mfbukowski]

Well, Rob apparently has been sheltering duplicituous Doges. Perhaps from the Byzantines.

Wasn't some of them guys from Venus? I heard they was Venutions or something like that. Had a big palace there I think on Venus.

[Robert F. Smith]

Regarding the Protestant minister: CFR.

I don't have their names readily at hand, but I actually met a couple of unrelated Pentecostal ministers who believed the Book of Mormon to be the word of God. I met them in Kansas City. I consider that to be unusual, even surprising.

However, I don't consider applying the term "Mormon" to the members of every little splinter group out there to be productive or meaningful -- even though there are a variety of groups which so self-identify, including branches of Affirmation: Gay Mormons United (GMU), Mormons for Marriage (M4M), as well as Mormon Stories Regional Support Community (Dehlin), Mormon Transhumanist Association, Mormon Zeitgeist e-zine & forums, New Order Mormons (NOM), Recovery from Mormonism (RfM), Reform Mormonism (RM), United Mormon Church, etc.

[Robert F. Smith]

Wasn't some of them guys from Venus? I heard they was Venutions or something like that. Had a big palace there I think on Venus.

No, you're thinking of Venice, California, with all the canals. Hugh Nibley lived there as a boy.

Edited September 5, 2012 by Robert F. Smith

[Storm Rider]

This is a bit of a farce to compare the label Christian to Mormon. A Christian is a broad term that defines a belief in Jesus of Nazareth. A Mormon is a a label used to define a church affiliation. Comparing a Mormon to an Episcopal, Roman Catholic, Southern Baptist is an apples and oranges comparison. A Christian compared to a Muslim, Jain, Buddhist would also be an acceptable comparison.

It was silly to propose this as an accurate comparison and demonstrates a lack of logic. So it is with critics; they dream up crap to discuss, never use the same standard for their own beliefs, doctrines, or teachings, and then so often possess that sanctimonious superiority that screams, "I don't know the Holy Spirit".

[mfbukowski]

No, you're thinking of Venice, California, with all the canals.

Canals? You must be thinking of Mars!

As far as Venice is concerned, I used to live there and can verify that there are many there who actually are from Venus, or at least they think they are!

Edited September 5, 2012 by mfbukowski

[altersteve]

Steve,

I have heard the Mormon "fullness of the gospel." I reject it. Am I following Christ to the best of my ability?

That's ultimately not my call, but if you say you are then I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and believe you.

Edited September 5, 2012 by altersteve

[The Grimace]

Only God knows Rob. We aren't in the business of judging another mans servant.

That's ultimately not my call, but if you say you are then I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and believe you.

I've been around Latter-day Saints long enough to know that there are only two answers to any question - agreement, and "we don't judge". And "we don't judge" means "I disagree/disapprove" in LDS circles.

Edited September 5, 2012 by The Grimace

[Bart Burk]

Acceptance of baptisms - which, as you know, is an authority issue, nothing else - does not have anything to do with the "you're not Christian" designation.

LDS are more inclusive because they consider the individual and their relationship to Christ to be the qualifier, no matter what religious belief they happen to espouse. Many (not all) EVs, on the other hand, along with some Catholics make a corporate, blanket statement that Mormons either as individuals or as a body cannot be Christians. That's very, very exclusive - and frankly, flat out wrong.

Unfortunately, the Roman Catholic decision to say Mormon baptisms aren't Christian baptisms means the Vatican is saying that Mormons aren't Christian. It is not an authority issue because even an atheist can baptize in the name of the Trinity with water and have the baptism accepted by the Catholic Church. When I left Mormonism to become Catholic, I had to be baptized again. The Episcopalians and Baptists joining with me did not have to be baptized in the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church made the decision to baptize Mormons because the Mormon teaching on the Godhead didn't square with their understanding of the Trinity. That decision was made even though traditionally the Catholic Church had accepted the baptism of those who used the right form and matter even when they had a differing understanding of the nature of God. To that extent I now believe the Catholic Church's decision was mean-spirited. It was meant to say that Mormons aren't Christians.

[altersteve]

I've been around Latter-day Saints long enough to know that there are only two answers to any question - agreement, and "we don't judge". And "we don't judge" means "I disagree/disapprove" in LDS circles.

Sorry, but if I disagree with someone then I'll say it. We Latter-day Saints are not afraid to speak our minds.

[Zeta-Flux]

I've been around Latter-day Saints long enough to know that there are only two answers to any question - agreement, and "we don't judge". And "we don't judge" means "I disagree/disapprove" in LDS circles.

Um... are you finding fault in a people which either agree or disagree with you? And fault them for leaving condemnation to God?

Sheesh.

(By the way, there are many other options in my experience. We could frankly say "I don't agree." We could say "I don't know." On occasion we can be judgmental (although I hope we repent of that). etc...)

Edited September 5, 2012 by Zeta-Flux

[volgadon]

I've been around Latter-day Saints long enough to know that there are only two answers to any question - agreement, and "we don't judge". And "we don't judge" means "I disagree/disapprove" in LDS circles.

It means, "I don't judge." I have no way of knowing for sure if Rob is following Christ to the best of his abilitiy or not, as I can't see into his heart.

[zerinus]

Unfortunately, the Roman Catholic decision to say Mormon baptisms aren't Christian baptisms means the Vatican is saying that Mormons aren't Christian. It is not an authority issue because even an atheist can baptize in the name of the Trinity with water and have the baptism accepted by the Catholic Church. When I left Mormonism to become Catholic, I had to be baptized again. The Episcopalians and Baptists joining with me did not have to be baptized in the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church made the decision to baptize Mormons because the Mormon teaching on the Godhead didn't square with their understanding of the Trinity. That decision was made even though traditionally the Catholic Church had accepted the baptism of those who used the right form and matter even when they had a differing understanding of the nature of God. To that extent I now believe the Catholic Church's decision was mean-spirited. It was meant to say that Mormons aren't Christians.

It was a sop to please the Evangelicals, nothing more--although the LDS Church treats the Catholic Church with far more respect than the Evangelicals do.