Do the majority of members of the Latter-day Saints Church want to be known as Christians?

[Navidad]

I must admit to a bit of confusion. At some cost, I have been very avid in stating that LDS Christians are just that - Christians. Then I read various posts on this forum like this one that seem to indicate that members of the Church prefer to think of themselves as different from, probably superior to, the rest of Christendom. "The LDS belief is closer to the truth about God than Christianity, but the LDS have their own errors to rationally work through as they reach for the light." It seems there has been interest on the part of folks like Stephen Robinson to work on bringing us under the same Christian umbrella, but at the same time a sense on the part of some that members of the Church are not Christian and don't want to be known as such. Has there ever been an official statement by the Brethren about this? Don't the Brethren see themselves as Christians? The Christian tent is diverse on non-essential beliefs and firm on certain core beliefs that I believe that LDS Christians believe. Yet, I sense a real divergence among the LDS Christians on this forum regarding their interest in becoming "mainstream." That seems to be a negative concept for many. I personally believe we all gain from what we can learn from each other, but certainly some Christians don't believe that as well as some Saints. It is almost like just at the time some in the mainstream Christian world is beginning to accept Saints as such, the Saints are saying "No thank you." We are perfectly content being the "other," the "peculiar people." Being Mennonite I understand that to some degree. We have always thought of ourselves as being non-Protestant, more restorationist that reformational, a "peculiar people," a "third way" (from Catholics or Protestants), the quiet in the land, etc. etc. But, we do this from a firm foothold in the great and greater Christian community. I understand it when Saints contrast themselves and their beliefs with Protestantism, evangelicalism, fundamentalism, etc. but I get really confused when you contrast yourselves to Christians. In six hours I will head off to three hours of services, the vast majority of which will be completely Christian in nature, essence, and teaching. Is this hesitation that I "feel" from many of you based on 190 years of distrust, feeling persecuted and not wanting to cozy up to the gentile, enemy world that mainstream Christianity represents? Will Saints ever let that go, is it a badge of honor, or not relevant to the topic? I value your input. I hope I have asked this in a way that is non-offensive. I mean no offense. I have paid a price for my testimony about the Saints; I am simply wondering if it is in vain? Thanks.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Navidad

[mfbukowski]

Perhaps if you had quoted the correct name of the church, and actually been as familiar with us as you think you are, you would know the answer.

It is "yes". But we feel that the name Christian has been co-opted 2 exclude us. It is groups called Christian that exclude us not the other way around.

And so some of us end up saying forget about the alleged Christians we don't want to be part of them. We are the true church of Christ. They have still won the name.

But we have already been over this a hundred times with you. In various variations

 

 

 

Edited October 14, 2018 by mfbukowski

[Gray]

I think LDS Christians would be a good adjective for church members to use for themselves, but apparently LDS is verboten.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Gray

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Perhaps if you had quoted the correct name of the church, and actually been as familiar with us as you think you are, you would know the answer.

It is "yes". But we feel that the name Christian has been co-opted 2 exclude us. It is groups called Christian that exclude us not the other way around.

And so some of us end up saying forget about the alleged Christians we don't want to be part of them. We are the true church of Christ. They have still won the name.

But we have already been over this a hundred times with you. In various variations

 

 

 

I thought by writing "the Church" I was being complimentary. That certainly is the term used in our ward most often to refer to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I  also thought referring to the members as LDS Christians was a positive from what I have read on this forum. I am most interested in knowing if the leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have ever weighed in on this at a General Conference Talk; etc. I am familiar with the 1978 paper put out about brothers and sisters in Christ, but that doesn't deal directly with the question. So is "the true church of Christ" now the correct name of the church? 🙂 I have decided to become impervious to snarkiness! Give me your best shot! I have also decided to say much less about what I think and stick to asking questions. I don't believe it is right to ask questions to which you already know the answers in the hopes of creating friction or putting someone down or entrapping someone. Having said that, until the moderator removes my ability to post I will ask questions in an attempt to understand Latter-day Saints better. Especially if I think I observe a trend among the members here that confuses me like a recent tendency to disparage Christianity when I thought I had a correct understanding that the folks in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints were interested in being known as Christians. I am confused by some of the statements.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Navidad

[The Nehor]

Yes, but we also want to remain unique. We are demanding that way.

[BonhoefferFan]

I am quite ok with being considered Christian. 

[RevTestament]

7 hours ago, Navidad said:

I must admit to a bit of confusion. At some cost, I have been very avid in stating that LDS Christians are just that - Christians. Then I read various posts on this forum like this one that seem to indicate that members of the Church prefer to think of themselves as different from, probably superior to, the rest of Christendom. "The LDS belief is closer to the truth about God than Christianity, but the LDS have their own errors to rationally work through as they reach for the light." It seems there has been interest on the part of folks like Stephen Robinson to work on bringing us under the same Christian umbrella, but at the same time a sense on the part of some that members of the Church are not Christian and don't want to be known as such. Has there ever been an official statement by the Brethren about this? Don't the Brethren see themselves as Christians? The Christian tent is diverse on non-essential beliefs and firm on certain core beliefs that I believe that LDS Christians believe. Yet, I sense a real divergence among the LDS Christians on this forum regarding their interest in becoming "mainstream." That seems to be a negative concept for many. I personally believe we all gain from what we can learn from each other, but certainly some Christians don't believe that as well as some Saints. It is almost like just at the time some in the mainstream Christian world is beginning to accept Saints as such, the Saints are saying "No thank you." We are perfectly content being the "other," the "peculiar people." Being Mennonite I understand that to some degree. We have always thought of ourselves as being non-Protestant, more restorationist that reformational, a "peculiar people," a "third way" (from Catholics or Protestants), the quiet in the land, etc. etc. But, we do this from a firm foothold in the great and greater Christian community. I understand it when Saints contrast themselves and their beliefs with Protestantism, evangelicalism, fundamentalism, etc. but I get really confused when you contrast yourselves to Christians. In six hours I will head off to three hours of services, the vast majority of which will be completely Christian in nature, essence, and teaching. Is this hesitation that I "feel" from many of you based on 190 years of distrust, feeling persecuted and not wanting to cozy up to the gentile, enemy world that mainstream Christianity represents? Will Saints ever let that go, is it a badge of honor, or not relevant to the topic? I value your input. I hope I have asked this in a way that is non-offensive. I mean no offense. I have paid a price for my testimony about the Saints; I am simply wondering if it is in vain? Thanks.

Well, I guess I'll hazard another answer. To a certain extent I can only speak for myself, but as a member of 42 years, I think I have a pretty good handle on the general feelings of the saints. I certainly feel I am a LDS Christian. If you ask that of the vast majority of Saints, they will say sure, I'm a Christian. In past days they would say I'm a Mormon too. I don't think most have any hostile feelings about being Christian. I think the feelings of resentment towards "the Gentiles" of much of the last two centuries have died down, but Saints certainly do have a feeling of being "other Christians." In the essential teachings of the gospel, I have no doubt about the Saints being Christian. We don't believe "another Gospel" Protestants try to claim by Paul. Paul taught the gospel was 1. faith in the Lord, Jesus Christ. 2. belief that He died for us, ie repentance and the atonement, and 3. belief in His resurrection, ie the resurrection. That's what Paul was saying the gospel is. How do we believe some "other gospel?" We don't. That is what we believe. No angel has taught us any different, yet, I hear this scripture applied to us frequently(Gal 1:8), as if we believe some "other gospel." In all the essential basics of the Christian gospel we agree. Does believing that we take on a commitment to do His works as part of the covenant of salvation somehow make us un-Christian? No. We still believe in His grace to save us. Is doing His will somehow going to un-save other Christians? Of course not.

The feelings of some Christians that those who do not believe in the doctrine of the trinity are not Christian are not warranted. I believe in part they come out of a past in which most non-trinitarians refute that Jesus is God, and do not accept His "divinity." This debate goes back to the earliest days of the Roman Church. However, we do not dispute that Yeshua is God/Elohim. I in fact believe that is the very essence of His message - that we can be Sons and Daughters too.  And therein lies the rub - or one of the main ways we are different. Our concept of the nature of God is different. How does that make us un-Christian? We share all the same basic principles of the gospel. Well, our beliefs are "heretical." I guess that means we would be kicked out of the Roman State Church, and in ancient times would have been burned at the stake. I believe almost directly opposite each point of the Nicene Creed. I do not believe the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit are "one substance", ie homoousios. Scripture teaches the Father taught Yeshua all things before they came to pass. He is a servant too. I do not believe the Son was begotten before all ages/worlds. I believe scripture that the Son was begotten in time when the Father said to Him, Thou art my Son. This DAY I have begotten thee. I believe He was essentially adopted as the Son. So, He wasn't always the Son. In essence the Son is a priesthood office to which He was called, and agreed to take on.  Well, this just won't fit in the typical modern Christian paradigm, which has no room to include prior worlds. And hence the common Christian debate about the creation of the universe, and trying to twist that into a time only some 6000 years ago. I believe that effort has done much more damage than good - and many people are no longer Christian as a result. Anyway, the LDS Christian view is much more expansive, but still in the fundamental basics of the gospel which make the foundation of Christianity, we are the same.

Look at my signature below. Orthodox Christianity has no room for an expanded understanding of the nature of God. It is fixed because of the creeds. We believe God continues to teach us about Himself. Indeed, I believe in the most fundamental way Christ was the revelator of the Father. When He died up on the cross, the veil of the temple was rent, because He was "showing the way to the holiest of all."Heb 9:3,8. I believe that quite literally. He was showing us plainly of the Father even as He said He would do. John 16:25. He was doing everything He had seen the Father do - and did nothing of Himself - but as the Father taught Him. It is plain. It is staring us right in the face - unseen so to speak, although Joseph Smith began to teach it. So, in my own way of thinking, I have a more accurate understanding of the scriptures than the typical Christian. That doesn't make me better, but it does make me different. I am different from many of my LDS brethren as well, but still consider myself fully LDS Christian, and haven't been kicked out yet... When I tell you these things, I bet your first response is to think  ""he is way out there." Does that mean I am not Christian? I believe the words of Christ to the letter really, and He tells us "He that believeth in me, the works that I do, shall He do also; and greater works shall he do, because I go unto my Father." This is why I tend to harp on the creeds. They have no room for my very scriptural beliefs, and hence no room for such a close relationship with God so as to be able to do the works of the Father. But, if people wish to believe them, I cannot stop them. They simply are not inspired of God, and are essentially misleading in very important ways. Following them is not going to make someone unchristian, but I don't believe it is going to point them towards God. I have left them far in my rear mirror - since my early teen years. They do not fill me with light nor understanding.

Despite your opinion, there are still millions of Christians in the world that follow the creeds, because the major churches are the descendants of the early Roman State Church which promulgated them. And they will not open their mind to the teachings of the LDS Church because of them, but have been trained by those creeds to think of us as heretical, and worthy of excommunication, even though in the most fundamental teachings of the gospel we are the same. As LDS Christians we aspire to be like Christ, because in some fundamental way (although this varies within the Church) we believe we can be. And in this we share some ideas of the early so-called Arian Christians, who eventually lost the scriptural battle to the creeds. 

Edited October 14, 2018 by RevTestament

[cinepro]

8 hours ago, Navidad said:

Is this hesitation that I "feel" from many of you based on 190 years of distrust, feeling persecuted and not wanting to cozy up to the gentile, enemy world that mainstream Christianity represents? Will Saints ever let that go, is it a badge of honor, or not relevant to the topic? I value your input. I hope I have asked this in a way that is non-offensive. I mean no offense. I have paid a price for my testimony about the Saints; I am simply wondering if it is in vain? Thanks.

I think it's a common problem for many brands.  You are placed in a category, but want to be unique (and superior) in that category. 

It would be like if everyone started calling RC Cola "RC Fizzy Water", and the company started losing sales because people just weren't sure what kind of flavor it was. They new it was a carbonated drink of some kind, but weren't willing to take a chance. 

But if it's "RC Cola", then we know what kind of fizzy water it is.  It's meant to compete on flavor and price with Coke and Pepsi.  We then look at it as an alternative for those drinks.  So instead of being "Mormon", which perhaps to some seems weird and outside of "normal" religions like Baptists or Catholics, we are trying to be grouped more closely with them.  We need to convince people that we're in the same category ("Christianity"), and that the differences, while critically important, are a matter of degree, not category.

Edited October 14, 2018 by cinepro

[Spammer]

44 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

... there are still millions of Christians in the world that follow the creeds, because the major churches are the descendants of the early Roman State Church which promulgated them. And they will not open their mind to the teaching

Belief among Christians that God is a disembodied, spiritual essence; Father, Son and Holy Spirit; and created matter out of nothing predates the existence of the Roman state church by at least two centuries. The state only promulgated what was already believed by many, if not most.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Spammer

[RevTestament]

14 minutes ago, Spammer said:

Belief among Christians that God is a disembodied, spiritual essence; Father, Son and Holy Spirit; and created matter out of nothing predates the existence of the Roman state church by at least two centuries. The state only promulgated what was already believed by many, if not most.

Maybe, but the Father seems to believe that He cannot be seen in the fullness of His glory without killing us....

which certainly means He has some form of visible, physical body. See also John 5. 

[Spammer]

4 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

Maybe, but the Father seems to believe that He cannot be seen in the fullness of His glory without killing us....

which certainly means He has some form of visible, physical body. See also John 5. 

No maybe about it and I agree, God did take on a visible, physical body in the person of the divine logos, the Word of God incarnate. As you say, it’s all there in John, as well as in the writings of the 2nd century church fathers. 

[RevTestament]

29 minutes ago, Spammer said:

No maybe about it and I agree, God did take on a visible, physical body in the person of the divine logos, the Word of God incarnate. As you say, it’s all there in John, as well as in the writings of the 2nd century church fathers. 

And this is why we don't believe in the doctrine of the trinity.

[Glenn101]

   I just don't concern myself over that label any longer. I never really thought about it until it was brought up in discussions forums and I was not shy about registering my opinion on the subject, but ultimately it is just a label. It is more important to me how I am viewed by the Christ than how other professing Christians view me.

Glenn

[Spammer]

17 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

And this is why we don't believe in the doctrine of the trinity.

Naturally. You wouldn’t be LDS if you interpreted John like we did. And don’t forget, the only reason you have John in your Bible to interpret is because we put it there.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Spammer

[Storm Rider]

9 hours ago, Navidad said:

I must admit to a bit of confusion. At some cost, I have been very avid in stating that LDS Christians are just that - Christians. Then I read various posts on this forum like this one that seem to indicate that members of the Church prefer to think of themselves as different from, probably superior to, the rest of Christendom. "The LDS belief is closer to the truth about God than Christianity, but the LDS have their own errors to rationally work through as they reach for the light." It seems there has been interest on the part of folks like Stephen Robinson to work on bringing us under the same Christian umbrella, but at the same time a sense on the part of some that members of the Church are not Christian and don't want to be known as such. Has there ever been an official statement by the Brethren about this? Don't the Brethren see themselves as Christians? The Christian tent is diverse on non-essential beliefs and firm on certain core beliefs that I believe that LDS Christians believe. Yet, I sense a real divergence among the LDS Christians on this forum regarding their interest in becoming "mainstream." That seems to be a negative concept for many. I personally believe we all gain from what we can learn from each other, but certainly some Christians don't believe that as well as some Saints. It is almost like just at the time some in the mainstream Christian world is beginning to accept Saints as such, the Saints are saying "No thank you." We are perfectly content being the "other," the "peculiar people." Being Mennonite I understand that to some degree. We have always thought of ourselves as being non-Protestant, more restorationist that reformational, a "peculiar people," a "third way" (from Catholics or Protestants), the quiet in the land, etc. etc. But, we do this from a firm foothold in the great and greater Christian community. I understand it when Saints contrast themselves and their beliefs with Protestantism, evangelicalism, fundamentalism, etc. but I get really confused when you contrast yourselves to Christians. In six hours I will head off to three hours of services, the vast majority of which will be completely Christian in nature, essence, and teaching. Is this hesitation that I "feel" from many of you based on 190 years of distrust, feeling persecuted and not wanting to cozy up to the gentile, enemy world that mainstream Christianity represents? Will Saints ever let that go, is it a badge of honor, or not relevant to the topic? I value your input. I hope I have asked this in a way that is non-offensive. I mean no offense. I have paid a price for my testimony about the Saints; I am simply wondering if it is in vain? Thanks.

Hello Phil,

I think this is one area where members of the Church have some confusion. I think we emphatically desire to be known as disciples and followers of Jesus Christ. As such, we want to be recognized as Christian. Yet, this is where the confusion lies - we want to be recognized as Christian and we still want to remain apart. This is tied up with our beliefs in the Restoration of the Church. For members of the Church, we do not have an understanding of how there are so many Protestant churches - they stem from Catholicism, yet have no story of a restoration or being directed by God to start their own churches. In many ways, this confuses us and we too often discount them for this underlying reason. 

I think in many ways we, as a people, do not feel accepted by the Christian world. Far too often we hear the attacks of the rather ignorant anti-Mormons and assume that is how all of Christianity views us. Evangelicals are some of the most notorious for their ridiculous attacks on Church beliefs and teachings. As a young man, I remember visiting people in the south that were convinced that Mormons had tails, that we were demons of a sort. These wild and wooly tales came from their pastors and preachers that were more interested in demeaning the evil Mormons rather than actually discuss real doctrinal differences. 

I do think that members of the Church, and the Church itself, will find a more amicable place within Christianity. This will be observed in ever more cooperation in serving the needy and the downtrodden. Though we may all one day learn to respect one another's beliefs, I am not hopeful that we will actually well understand one another's beliefs.

[mfbukowski]

5 hours ago, Navidad said:

I thought by writing "the Church" I was being complimentary. That certainly is the term used in our ward most often to refer to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I  also thought referring to the members as LDS Christians was a positive from what I have read on this forum. I am most interested in knowing if the leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have ever weighed in on this at a General Conference Talk; etc. I am familiar with the 1978 paper put out about brothers and sisters in Christ, but that doesn't deal directly with the question. So is "the true church of Christ" now the correct name of the church? 🙂 I have decided to become impervious to snarkiness! Give me your best shot! I have also decided to say much less about what I think and stick to asking questions. I don't believe it is right to ask questions to which you already know the answers in the hopes of creating friction or putting someone down or entrapping someone. Having said that, until the moderator removes my ability to post I will ask questions in an attempt to understand Latter-day Saints better. Especially if I think I observe a trend among the members here that confuses me like a recent tendency to disparage Christianity when I thought I had a correct understanding that the folks in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints were interested in being known as Christians. I am confused by some of the statements.

You can look up conference talks as well as I can

 

[Scott Lloyd]

In response to the question in the thread title, I’ll say I think most of us would be content to have our worship of and belief in the divinity of Christ recognized and not to have others lie about us because they differ with us doctrinally  

 

 

 

 

[pogi]

11 hours ago, Navidad said:

I must admit to a bit of confusion. At some cost, I have been very avid in stating that LDS Christians are just that - Christians. Then I read various posts on this forum like this one that seem to indicate that members of the Church prefer to think of themselves as different from, probably superior to, the rest of Christendom. "The LDS belief is closer to the truth about God than Christianity, but the LDS have their own errors to rationally work through as they reach for the light." It seems there has been interest on the part of folks like Stephen Robinson to work on bringing us under the same Christian umbrella, but at the same time a sense on the part of some that members of the Church are not Christian and don't want to be known as such. Has there ever been an official statement by the Brethren about this? Don't the Brethren see themselves as Christians? The Christian tent is diverse on non-essential beliefs and firm on certain core beliefs that I believe that LDS Christians believe. Yet, I sense a real divergence among the LDS Christians on this forum regarding their interest in becoming "mainstream." That seems to be a negative concept for many. I personally believe we all gain from what we can learn from each other, but certainly some Christians don't believe that as well as some Saints. It is almost like just at the time some in the mainstream Christian world is beginning to accept Saints as such, the Saints are saying "No thank you." We are perfectly content being the "other," the "peculiar people." Being Mennonite I understand that to some degree. We have always thought of ourselves as being non-Protestant, more restorationist that reformational, a "peculiar people," a "third way" (from Catholics or Protestants), the quiet in the land, etc. etc. But, we do this from a firm foothold in the great and greater Christian community. I understand it when Saints contrast themselves and their beliefs with Protestantism, evangelicalism, fundamentalism, etc. but I get really confused when you contrast yourselves to Christians. In six hours I will head off to three hours of services, the vast majority of which will be completely Christian in nature, essence, and teaching. Is this hesitation that I "feel" from many of you based on 190 years of distrust, feeling persecuted and not wanting to cozy up to the gentile, enemy world that mainstream Christianity represents? Will Saints ever let that go, is it a badge of honor, or not relevant to the topic? I value your input. I hope I have asked this in a way that is non-offensive. I mean no offense. I have paid a price for my testimony about the Saints; I am simply wondering if it is in vain? Thanks.

It is not in vain.  Thank you for standing-up for us!  I know you have received flak for it. 

You asked if there is an official statment about this.  There is this:

https://www.lds.org/topics/christians?lang=eng

I would recommend reading the whole article, but here are a couple snippets:

Quote

 

Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints unequivocally affirm themselves to be Christians. 

While members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have no desire to compromise the distinctiveness of the restored Church of Jesus Christ, they wish to work together with other Christians—and people of all faiths—to recognize and remedy many of the moral and family issues faced by society. The Christian conversation is richer for what the Latter-day Saints bring to the table. There is no good reason for Christian faiths to ostracize each other when there has never been more urgent need for unity in proclaiming the divinity and teachings of Jesus Christ.

 

I agree with that!

The problem comes in definitions.  "Christian" means different things to different people.  By some accounts (including your definition), we absolutely are Christian.  By other accounts/definitions, no we are not that type of Christian. 

From the article:

Quote

 

In recent decades, however, some have claimed that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not a Christian church. The most oft-used reasons are the following:

1) Latter-day Saints do not accept the creeds, confessions, and formulations of post–New Testament Christianity.
2) The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not descend through the historical line of traditional Christianity. That is, Latter-day Saints are not Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, or Protestant.
3) Latter-day Saints do not believe scripture consists of the Holy Bible alone but have an expanded canon of scripture that includes the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price.

 

If that is THE definition of Christianity, then no, we are not Christian.  We simply don't accept that definition and still view ourselves as Christian.  I think some on here are fed up with defending ourselves as Christians.  I can understand that.  There is nothing salvific about the title, so why not just save ourselves the trouble and adopt a new title - Christologists, Christ-ites, or something like that.  So, I can see both sides.  But far and wide, Latter-day Saints view themselves as Christians.

Edited October 14, 2018 by pogi

[theplains]

11 hours ago, Navidad said:

"The LDS belief is closer to the truth about God than Christianity, but the LDS have their own errors to rationally work through as they reach for the light." 

Would this be true if Heavenly Father was not once a man who became a God like the LDS Church teaches?

Thanks,
Jim

[Navidad]

33 minutes ago, pogi said:

It is not in vain.  Thank you for standing-up for us!  I know you have received flak for it. 

You asked if there is an official statment about this.  There is this:

https://www.lds.org/topics/christians?lang=eng

I would recommend reading the whole article, but here are a couple snippets:

I agree with that!

The problem comes in definitions.  "Christian" means different things to different people.  By some accounts (including your definition), we absolutely are Christian.  By other accounts/definitions, no we are not that type of Christian. 

From the article:

If that is THE definition of Christianity, then no, we are not Christian.  We simply don't accept that definition and still view ourselves as Christian.  I think some on here are fed up with defending ourselves as Christians.  I can understand that.  There is nothing salvific about the title, so why not just save ourselves the trouble and adopt a new title - Christologists, Christ-ites, or something like that.  So, I can see both sides.  But far and wide, Latter-day Saints view themselves as Christians.

I just replied to your post, but now it is gone! My point was that Mennonites fail two out of the three tests you mentioned. We are non-creedal, and are neither Protestants, Catholics, or Orthodox. I have never heard of those three being used as a standard for Christianity. The issue that seems to be the most often used against the Saints is their Christology - the doctrine of Christ and on occasional that of being polytheists. The article was perfect. That is just what I was looking for. Thanks so much

[Calm]

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Yes, but we also want to remain unique. We are demanding that way.

That is probably the way most individuals feel about themselves; they want to be seen as an important part of the communities they see themselves as part of, but also want to be seen as an individual, unique and therefore not replaceable, etc.  Hardly surprising to me those desires get attached to the communities we belong to as well.

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

Hello Phil,

I think this is one area where members of the Church have some confusion. I think we emphatically desire to be known as disciples and followers of Jesus Christ. As such, we want to be recognized as Christian. Yet, this is where the confusion lies - we want to be recognized as Christian and we still want to remain apart. This is tied up with our beliefs in the Restoration of the Church. For members of the Church, we do not have an understanding of how there are so many Protestant churches - they stem from Catholicism, yet have no story of a restoration or being directed by God to start their own churches. In many ways, this confuses us and we too often discount them for this underlying reason. 

I think in many ways we, as a people, do not feel accepted by the Christian world. Far too often we hear the attacks of the rather ignorant anti-Mormons and assume that is how all of Christianity views us. Evangelicals are some of the most notorious for their ridiculous attacks on Church beliefs and teachings. As a young man, I remember visiting people in the south that were convinced that Mormons had tails, that we were demons of a sort. These wild and wooly tales came from their pastors and preachers that were more interested in demeaning the evil Mormons rather than actually discuss real doctrinal differences. 

I do think that members of the Church, and the Church itself, will find a more amicable place within Christianity. This will be observed in ever more cooperation in serving the needy and the downtrodden. Though we may all one day learn to respect one another's beliefs, I am not hopeful that we will actually well understand one another's beliefs.

Those who attack the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints so vehemently are not evangelicals. They are fundamentalists. There is a significant difference. I think you have hit the nail on the head. LDS Christians seem to me to want to be in the fold while being apart, different from, the "other." In family therapy it is called the "go away closer disease." When one family member is abused, he or she wants to hug the abuser while at the same time pushing him (usually) away. It is a trigger for real mental health issues. A lot of folks have studied the the LDS Christians in this regard. It is pretty interesting stuff.

[pogi]

6 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I just replied to your post, but now it is gone! My point was that Mennonites fail two out of the three tests you mentioned. We are non-creedal, and are neither Protestants, Catholics, or Orthodox. I have never heard of those three being used as a standard for Christianity. The issue that seems to be the most often used against the Saints is their Christology - the doctrine of Christ and on occasional that of being polytheists. The article was perfect. That is just what I was looking for. Thanks so much

You are welcome.  

Our Christology is precisely what goes against their creeds.  Because we don't accept those creeds, we are not Christian, according to many I have encountered on these forums.  I am actually surprised to hear you say that you are non-creedal.  You previously mentioned that you are evangelical before Mennonite. Do you not subscribe to their creeds as an evangelical.  If not, how can you say that you are evangelical?

[Navidad]

I have been very encouraged by this Pew Research article. I would encourage you all to read it. It documents the lessening of the opposition between Christian groups. I find that heartening. It is so much better for us to focus on our commonalities than on our differences. I also think I read somewhere that Pew has documented over 200 different groups who identify themselves as "Mormon," defined by being follower of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. I need to find the citation. So, welcome to the diverse world of Protestant pluralism! Ha! Here is the link (I am not sure the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints are aware of the trend described in the article):

http://www.pewforum.org/2017/08/31/after-500-years-reformation-era-divisions-have-lost-much-of-their-potency/

[Calm]

Quote

Those who attack the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints so vehemently are not evangelicals. They are fundamentalists. There is a significant difference. 

However, most who do so identify themselves as evangelicals in my experience.