Dear Evangelical Friends: Can A Mormon Be A Christian?

[JLHPROF]

You may wish to consider Matthew 7:22-24.  No one is suggesting that Christians are to do evil things to prove that they are saved by grace. However, Christians are suggesting that a saved person will do things, not from the perspective of earning salvation but with a spirit filled heart to be a profitable witness of the GOSPEL message. That message concerns what Christ did on the cross and upon His resurrection and not about proving the validity of some "other" testament.

 

Mormons don't "EARN" salvation either.  They need grace just as much as anyone.

And, I love Matthew 7, but don't stop at 24.

²⁴ Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

²⁵ And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

²⁶ And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:

²⁷ And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

 

There's those works again.  Christ won't accept merely claiming him as Savior.  You have to keep his sayings/commandments.

[ERayR]

You may wish to consider Matthew 7:22-24.  No one is suggesting that Christians are to do evil things to prove that they are saved by grace. However, Christians are suggesting that a saved person will do things, not from the perspective of earning salvation but with a spirit filled heart to be a profitable witness of the GOSPEL message. That message concerns what Christ did on the cross and upon His resurrection and not about proving the validity of some "other" testament.

 

Don't forget James 2:19-20  -  19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

[Flyonthewall]

You may wish to consider Matthew 7:22-24.  No one is suggesting that Christians are to do evil things to prove that they are saved by grace. However, Christians are suggesting that a saved person will do things, not from the perspective of earning salvation but with a spirit filled heart to be a profitable witness of the GOSPEL message. That message concerns what Christ did on the cross and upon His resurrection and not about proving the validity of some "other" testament.

The key to Matthew 7:22-24 is " but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven."... which is what we are saying. You(generally speaking) say we try to earn our salvation, which we do not. We try to DO the will of the Father as we understandit. We wouldn't be trying to do the will of the Father if we did not believe or have faith.

It is what we DO that we are judged by so we do want to have a favorable judgment... wouldn't you?

[LittleNipper]

Perhaps God considers what I'm doing here just one of many works... That would make me a witness, a minister, a missionary, a teacher...

[danielwoods]

No, Paul does not use them interchangeably. He uses "put on Christ" only once and specifically in reference to being baptized, with is clearly not the same as having the Spirit or Christ in you. 

 

Paul is writing to the Saints (Baptized members of the Church) in Rome. Nearly all of his letters are to address short comings in doctrinal understanding or actions of the saints. To argue that Paul is addressing unbelievers is to claim that one can be an unbeliever and also a saint, which makes no sense. But I am used to seeing a lot of senselessness when EVs are arguing against Mormons. 

 

So, the believing devils must end up with God then.

This also presents another conundrum for Trinitarians. If God is one being and is also Omni-present then EVERYONE is in the presents of the Father all of the time.

All very nice. But that doesn't support your argument here.

 

Again, you are going to have to address the issue I raised above.

If God is Trinitarian, explain how anyone is EVER separated from the Father.

 

The conundrum if you want to call it that, is the mystery of having a relationship with an infinite being, which we will never fully be able to explain or comprehend. 

 

The point stands though that your theological position is not taught in the NT. That the three persons of the Godhead are separated in Heaven or different levels of Heaven. 

 

As for your question about being separated from the Father, we experience that already on Earth. Christ has reconciled us who are believers. How does this separation occur? I don't know. God does. If I was to speculate, I would say that God hides his glory from us to some extent, and even more so later for those who reject him. 

[danielwoods]

1 Corinthians 15:41 describes the resurrection and how everyone will be resurrected to different glories - one likened to the sun, one likened to the moon, and one likened to the stars..."for one star differeth from another star in glory.". How many different glories does that make up? Sounds like there will be a lot of different states/glories of resurrection.

As I stated before, your concept is not as refined as ours.

 

Your concept isn't more refined. It's completely different. 

 

Let's take your example of different glories. What is Paul talking about here? The difference between each could be a reference to their brightness, and by way of application, every believer will have a different brightness or glory. It could be a reference to substance, or altitude or some other thing. The point is that the LDS take this concept and make it something the NT doesn't teach at all. Namely that there are different levels to Heaven. As you stated before, where the Father is at one, Jesus at another. Not more refined at all. Rather, completely different to what is taught in the NT. 

 

Which is OK if that's what you're looking for. 

 

Look, I believe we agree on the main points - We both believe in God - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

We both believe Jesus lived, died, was raised from the dead in 3 days and ascended to heaven. We both believe in the Final Judgment.

We see there are differences in our beliefs too, but embrace you as fellow Christians.

You see there are differences in our beliefs, and reject that we even believe in the same God.

Mark 9:38-40

Luke 9:49-50

Now I ask you, WWJD?

 

I live in the land of the LDS. When people ask me if I think the LDS are Christian, I say, "I think some are for sure, but I don't know." 

 

The reason I have come to this position is because despite the theological errors, I think that there is enough truth in LDS teachings to bring people to a saving relationship with Jesus, if they really want to find him. 

[MormonFreeThinker]

You guys look like them  

 

[Flyonthewall]

Your concept isn't more refined. It's completely different.

 

Let's take your example of different glories. What is Paul talking about here? The difference between each could be a reference to their brightness, and by way of application, every believer will have a different brightness or glory. It could be a reference to substance, or altitude or some other thing. The point is that the LDS take this concept and make it something the NT doesn't teach at all. Namely that there are different levels to Heaven. As you stated before, where the Father is at one, Jesus at another. Not more refined at all. Rather, completely different to what is taught in the NT. 

 

Which is OK if that's what you're looking for.

Essentially you don't know what he is talking about, but it cannot mean what LDS says it does.

It has been shown that different levels in heaven have indeed been mentioned in the NT, but you refuse to acknowledge it is there. Suit yourself.

 

 

I live in the land of the LDS. When people ask me if I think the LDS are Christian, I say, "I think some are for sure, but I don't know." 

 

The reason I have come to this position is because despite the theological errors, I think that there is enough truth in LDS teachings to bring people to a saving relationship with Jesus, if they really want to find him.

Does that apply to Evangelicals too? Some could be despite their theological errors?

[Vance]

The conundrum if you want to call it that, is the mystery of having a relationship with an infinite being, which we will never fully be able to explain or comprehend.

And yet Jesus taught that eternal life is to know the true God.

 

The point stands though that your theological position is not taught in the NT. That the three persons of the Godhead are separated in Heaven or different levels of Heaven.

It is alluded to. We don't claim that the Bible has the complete teachings of Jesus, neither does the Bible. 

 

As for your question about being separated from the Father, we experience that already on Earth.

It is not possible to escape an Omni-present God. So your theology has irreconcilable conflicts with itself.

Christ has reconciled us who are believers. How does this separation occur? I don't know. God does. If I was to speculate, I would say that God hides his glory from us to some extent, and even more so later for those who reject him.

See above. Until you can resolve this conflict you have no business disparaging what we believe.

[Vance]

Essentially you don't know what he is talking about, but it cannot mean what LDS says it does.

I have seen this several times. It is what I call the "I don't know what it means, but Mormons are wrong" approach. I don't find it very convincing.

[danielwoods]

Essentially you don't know what he is talking about, but it cannot mean what LDS says it does.

It has been shown that different levels in heaven have indeed been mentioned in the NT, but you refuse to acknowledge it is there. Suit yourself.

 

 

Does that apply to Evangelicals too? Some could be despite their theological errors?

 

Essentially what is taught in the NT, is what is taught. And what the LDS says and teaches is completely different. I would be surprised if you didn't already understand this. 

 

As I said, no where in the NT are there three heavens where God is separated. Is a "third heaven" mentioned? Of course. What does it mean? It's not completely explained. But I can tell you according to the NT teaching it doesn't mean that there are different levels where the Father dwells and the Son dwells separate from the Father. The whole purpose of salvation is unity and sharing the agape love that they already had before creation. So, no. I haven't refused to acknowledge what the NT teaches or mentions. I do reject theology that is contrary to what we already know (to the best of my ability that is). 

 

Does this apply to Evangelicals too? Of course. As I mentioned a while ago. God has grace for us, and this includes our errors in theology. To put it another way. God is greater than our small theological errors. 

[halconero]

Essentially what is taught in the NT, is what is taught. And what the LDS says and teaches is completely different. I would be surprised if you didn't already understand this. 

 

As I said, no where in the NT are there three heavens where God is separated. Is a "third heaven" mentioned? Of course. What does it mean? It's not completely explained. But I can tell you according to the NT teaching it doesn't mean that there are different levels where the Father dwells and the Son dwells separate from the Father. The whole purpose of salvation is unity and sharing the agape love that they already had before creation. So, no. I haven't refused to acknowledge what the NT teaches or mentions. I do reject theology that is contrary to what we already know (to the best of my ability that is). 

 

Does this apply to Evangelicals too? Of course. As I mentioned a while ago. God has grace for us, and this includes our errors in theology. To put it another way. God is greater than our small theological errors. 

 

I believe what marks the point of departure between us and Evangelicals is extrapolated from your second paragraph. Mormonism dares to give an authoritative answer to question like "what is the third heaven?" Many denominations, including yours, set up stakes and say "speculation is risky, authoritative explanation is heresy." It really comes down to the years-old debate of sola scriptura.

 

If God is greater than small theological errors, at what point does small become huge? Atonement theories? Nature of the Trinity? Transubstantiation?  

[danielwoods]

And yet Jesus taught that eternal life is to know the true God.

 

It is alluded to. We don't claim that the Bible has the complete teachings of Jesus, neither does the Bible. 

 

It is not possible to escape an Omni-present God. So your theology has irreconcilable conflicts with itself.

See above. Until you can resolve this conflict you have no business disparaging what we believe.

 

 

We agree, Eternal life is to Know him. As in have a direct relationship with him. I can have a relationship with someone and not completely understand them, those are two different types of knowing. 

 

The theological error of the three levels of heaven (where the Father, and Son are separate) is not eluded to at all. In fact, it's completely contrary to anything taught in the NT. As I mentioned above that unity with God (all three persons) was the goal. So to teach that there will be a separation is exact opposite of that message. 

 

First, I disagree with your theology. This means that I am attempting to make logical arguments against it. It doesn't mean that I'm "disparaging" what you believe. It's not personal. I'm not attacking you or anyone else personally. As I have said, I do believe that most if not all LDS are Christian, I just don't know. 

 

As for your definition of what an Omnipresent God (which you don't believe in) should be, it is in error. Further, it is scripture that teaches us that we can't escape the presence of God. Scripture also teaches us that he can hide his glory and pleasure. Hence, our experience here on Earth, "in this life you will have trouble…" 

[danielwoods]

I believe what marks the point of departure between us and Evangelicals is extrapolated from your second paragraph. Mormonism dares to give an authoritative answer to question like "what is the third heaven?" Many denominations, including yours, set up stakes and say "speculation is risky, authoritative explanation is heresy." It really comes down to the years-old debate of sola scriptura.

 

If God is greater than small theological errors, at what point does small become huge? Atonement theories? Nature of the Trinity? Transubstantiation?  

 

Extrapolation in the same direction that scripture teaches is fine. We all do that. What the LDS (or Joseph Smith specifically) have done, is speculate in a direction that is completely in the opposite direction of what scripture teaches. As I have been pointing out in this example of three levels of Heaven. It's completely contrary to say that God the Father won't be with all who are saved in Heaven. 

 

It's a good question that I honestly don't know the answer to. Nor do I think I ever will. At what point do our theological errors prevent us from gaining a saving relationship with God? I am constantly amazed at God's ways of getting around our short comings and connecting with us. 

[JLHPROF]

Perhaps God considers what I'm doing here just one of many works... That would make me a witness, a minister, a missionary, a teacher...

 

Witness and missionary I would agree with.

 

Minister - depends on your definition.

 

Teacher - nope.  That's based on the notion that your beliefs are new to us and that we haven't heard the doctrines of protestantism many times.  I would wager that pretty much every LDS member on this board has heard (and decided against) basically every argument you can put forth for evangelical beliefs.

 

That is one of the great flaws (that we share).  Both sides are always convinced that they will be able to give the other that "A-HA!" moment where they realize something they didn't before and are suddenly willing to change viewpoints.  Never going to happen.  Mormons have heard all the faith/grace/biblical infallibility arguments before and haven chosen the LDS teachings.  Evangelicals have (usually these days) heard the LDS teachings and have chosen to reject them.

 

There is a woman who has an anti-Mormon tv show here in Utah and she ALWAYS does this.  She likes to act like every doctrine of the Mormon Church will be news to Mormons and should cause them to convert to Protestantism.  She likes to say things like "Oooh - did you you Mormons know that you believe Jesus and Lucifer were spirit brothers?"  Like this is news to members and should cause them to leave the Church.

 

Most people have pretty much heard EVERY argument against the Church 100 times over.  And it doesn't sway us at all.

[Vance]

We agree, Eternal life is to Know him. As in have a direct relationship with him. I can have a relationship with someone and not completely understand them, those are two different types of knowing.

LOL! So now "know" must mean what you want it to mean, and not what I want it to mean because? 

Because you want it? LOL!!!

 

The theological error of the three levels of heaven (where the Father, and Son are separate) is not eluded to at all.

I agree, I think. It is hard to know what you really mean.

But, as I said earlier. The three heaven are directly mentioned and the three levels of glory are directly mentioned so, YES!!! our doctrine is alluded to.

In fact, it's completely contrary to anything taught in the NT.

And yet, you can't provide any support for this statement.

As I mentioned above that unity with God (all three persons) was the goal. So to teach that there will be a separation is exact opposite of that message.

Right !!! Because "unity" must mean only what you want it to mean. LOL!!! 

You still can't explain how anyone can be separate from the "Omni-present" God.

 

First, I disagree with your theology.

Obviously.

This means that I am attempting to make logical arguments against it.

And failing miserably.

As for your definition of what an Omnipresent God (which you don't believe in) should be, it is in error.

So, Omni-present doesn't mean what it means?

Further, it is scripture that teaches us that we can't escape the presence of God.

Ok, so no one is EVER separated from God. So what use is it to go to "heaven"? Is God more there in heaven and less there in other places?

So, God is in hell and God is in the devil?

[danielwoods]

LOL! So now "know" must mean what you want it to mean, and not what I want it to mean because? 

Because you want it? LOL!!!

 

I agree, I think. It is hard to know what you really mean.

But, as I said earlier. The three heaven are directly mentioned and the three levels of glory are directly mentioned so, YES!!! our doctrine is alluded to.

And yet, you can't provide any support for this statement.

Right !!! Because "unity" must mean only what you want it to mean. LOL!!! 

You still can't explain how anyone can be separate from the "Omni-present" God.

 

Obviously.

And failing miserably.

So, Omni-present doesn't mean what it means?

Ok, so no one is EVER separated from God. So what use is it to go to "heaven"? Is God more there in heaven and less there in other places?

So, God is in hell and God is in the devil?

 

The determination what Jesus meant is the context of his usage. Let's analyze John 17 a little. 

 

3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

 

Notice the context is "Know you…" it is clearly relationship knowing. Like knowing Joe the plumber down the street.

 

 

7 Now they know that everything you have given me comes from you. 8 For I gave them the words you gave me and they accepted them.

They knew with certainty that I came from you, and they believed that you sent me.

 

Notice the context here is factual knowledge, like knowing that cars run on gasoline. 

 

 

25 “Righteous Father, though the world does not know you, I know you,

 

 Notice both of these are relational knowledge 

 

and they know that you have sent me.

 

But this is factual knowledge

 

 

26 I have made you known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them.”

 

​And again back to relational knowledge.

 

 

 

As far as God separating into different heavens. No. It's never alluded to. There's not one scripture to support this concept. I have quoted many that teach God's unity. Even the last verse above states it. Unity is one of the largest messages in the Bible. 

[Vance]

The determination what Jesus meant is the context of his usage. Let's analyze John 17 a little. 

 

3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

 

Notice the context is "Know you…" it is clearly relationship knowing. Like knowing Joe the plumber down the street.

 

 

7 Now they know that everything you have given me comes from you. 8 For I gave them the words you gave me and they accepted them.

They knew with certainty that I came from you, and they believed that you sent me.

 

Notice the context here is factual knowledge, like knowing that cars run on gasoline. 

 

 

25 “Righteous Father, though the world does not know you, I know you,

 

 Notice both of these are relational knowledge 

 

and they know that you have sent me.

 

But this is factual knowledge

 

 

26 I have made you known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them.”

 

​And again back to relational knowledge.

Nothing there changes what I said. I can't even tell what point you are attempting to make.

As far as God separating into different heavens. No. It's never alluded to. There's not one scripture to support this concept.

I have already shown scriptures that allude to it. You responding by saying "uh uha" is not a refutation.

I have quoted many that teach God's unity.

Irrelevant. I have never claimed that members of the Godhead were not united.

Even the last verse above states it. Unity is one of the largest messages in the Bible.

Irrelevant. I have never claimed that members of the Godhead were not united.

[Vance]

I can have a relationship with someone and not completely understand them, those are two different types of knowing.

 

You don't really "know" someone unless you understand them.

[danielwoods]

Nothing there changes what I said. I can't even tell what point you are attempting to make.

I have already shown scriptures that allude to it. You responding by saying "uh uha" is not a refutation.

Irrelevant. I have never claimed that members of the Godhead were not united.

Irrelevant. I have never claimed that members of the Godhead were not united.

 

If God the Father is in one location (Celestial Kingdom) but not in another location, where Jesus is located. Is that not separation?

 

This concept is not alluded to at all, in fact, just the opposite is taught in the NT. Saying the fact that three heavens is mentioned it doesn't logically follow that this doctrine of separate locations is also  alluded to. It's like saying we are all on one team, except in Heaven, then we aren't all together. 

 

It very well could be that Paul was referencing his astronomical view of the heavens, and being caught up to the third heaven was just how high he guessed he was. The LDS doctrine doesn't logically follow that. 

 

 

 

You don't really "know" someone unless you understand them.

 

My point was to explain that knowing God personally, as in having a relationship with him, is Eternal life. This is based on John 17, not just how I want to understand knowing. 

 

As far as understanding someone. I don't think we ever fully understand anyone, even ourselves. But, getting to know anyone (and God) more and more is a process of growth in a relationship. 

[LittleNipper]

I find that people who are not seeking after exultation are far more open to what the Bible has to say as oppose to what Mormonism says. Say what you will about getting your own planet and the rest. As a Christian, I really don't care. I just want to see the Lord and praise him. An eternity of just being with the Lord would be more than enough joy for me.

[Vance]

If God the Father is in one location (Celestial Kingdom) but not in another location, where Jesus is located. Is that not separation?

You see, for us, having Jesus in a separate location from the Father is not a problem. It is only a problem for the "Omni-present" believers.

Jesus consistently taught that His Father was in Heaven, and Jesus was on earth. And He clearly and plainly used language describing Their separation. So, for us, Jesus being separated from the Father's physical location is not an issue.

 

This concept is not alluded to at all, in fact, just the opposite is taught in the NT.

Not really. And you saying so, does NOT make it so.

Saying the fact that three heavens is mentioned it doesn't logically follow that this doctrine of separate locations is also  alluded to. It's like saying we are all on one team, except in Heaven, then we aren't all together.

So team work requires all to be in one location? So, when Jesus was on Earth He was unable to be on the team? Who knew?

 

It very well could be that Paul was referencing his astronomical view of the heavens, and being caught up to the third heaven was just how high he guessed he was.

And it could also mean exactly what LDS doctrine believe it was.

So there.

The LDS doctrine doesn't logically follow that.

No it doesn't. So what is your point? (FYI, your arguments are devolving into silliness.)

 

My point was to explain that knowing God personally, as in having a relationship with him, is Eternal life. This is based on John 17, not just how I want to understand knowing.

Nope. It is strictly based on what you want it to mean. If you don't understand someone, then you don't truly know them. Simple as that. 

 

As far as understanding someone. I don't think we ever fully understand anyone, even ourselves.

And what you "think" about it changes what, exactly?

But, getting to know anyone (and God) more and more is a process of growth in a relationship.

Ok, so?

[JLHPROF]

I find that people who are not seeking after exultation are far more open to what the Bible has to say as oppose to what Mormonism says. Say what you will about getting your own planet and the rest. As a Christian, I really don't care. I just want to see the Lord and praise him. An eternity of just being with the Lord would be more than enough joy for me.

 

And this is exactly why I could never accept protestantism.  That sounds like absolute hell to me.

[Vance]

I find that people who are not seeking after exultation are far more open to what the Bible has to say as oppose to what Mormonism says.

LOL!!! You are funny.

Say what you will about getting your own planet and the rest. As a Christian, I really don't care. I just want to see the Lord and praise him. An eternity of just being with the Lord would be more than enough joy for me.

I don't see any reason why you won't get your wish.

[Flyonthewall]

Essentially what is taught in the NT, is what is taught. And what the LDS says and teaches is completely different. I would be surprised if you didn't already understand this. 

 

As I said, no where in the NT are there three heavens where God is separated. Is a "third heaven" mentioned? Of course. What does it mean? It's not completely explained. But I can tell you according to the NT teaching it doesn't mean that there are different levels where the Father dwells and the Son dwells separate from the Father. The whole purpose of salvation is unity and sharing the agape love that they already had before creation. So, no. I haven't refused to acknowledge what the NT teaches or mentions. I do reject theology that is contrary to what we already know (to the best of my ability that is). 

 

Does this apply to Evangelicals too? Of course. As I mentioned a while ago. God has grace for us, and this includes our errors in theology. To put it another way. God is greater than our small theological errors.

I think I see where you are a bit confused. Nobody says the Father and Son are separated.

The celestial kingdom is the highest of the three kingdoms of glory. Those in this kingdom will dwell forever in the presence of God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ.

Those who inherit terrestrial glory will “receive of the presence of the Son, but not of the fullness of the Father.

As you can see it is not the Father and Son that are separated but individuals based on their judgment.