Elder Wirthlin's definition of Christian

Gatorman · October 16, 2009

My opinion and understanding of Brother Wirthlin's talk. Christians are those who follow the teachings of Christ and believe that he died on the cross for them. As a Latter Day Saint, my faith teaches me that to obtain the highest degree of glory, that means I must follow the physical exaples and teachings of Christ, which include the 4 things Brother Wirthlin mentioned. Someone who doesn't follow or believe those things is no less Christian. However, they will not be able to achieve what we believe to be the highest glory or reward.

The difference you will often see is that people take exception that we don't believe in the TRinity or other simple differences and use that to say we are not Christian. In other words, unless we believe as you do, we can not be Christians. Our position is that you are Christian, if you believe in Christ, but that you may not have the fullness of the Gospel to be able to reach your fullest potential. But, you are still Christian.

beefche · October 16, 2009

Haven't we already been on this merry-go-round? I could promise I thought we just finished up a thread on what a Christian is according to LDS and other faiths. I love horses....don't like seeing them beaten.

Hemidakota · October 16, 2009

I'm a Protestant and I've always been interested in learning about other faiths. After talking with some LDS, I wanted to do more research and I found an article by Elder Joseph Wirthlin, LDS.org - Ensign Article - Christians in Belief and Action The article was helpful in some ways, but also very confusing. I'll give you a few quotes to explain.
I completely agree with that definition and statement.
Wirthlin then goes on to list the four principles of the gospel, which show how LDS are Christians according to that definition. I also believe the first and second principle of the gospel he lists, which are 'faith in the Lord Jesus Christ' and 'repentance.' Here are the third and forth principles:
I don't believe in either of those principles. According to Wirthlin's definition, I'm not a Christian.
Do you agree with Wirthlin that those principles are essential to being a Christian? If so, do you believe I can be a Christian if I don't follow some of those principles?

To the 'T'...if one wants to reside in GOD's presence for eternality, we have to practice what the Savior taught. There is no other way demonstrated outside of these teachings in order to be true follow of the Savior.

Hemidakota · October 16, 2009

Wirthlin starts off the article buy saying, "Some people erroneously believe that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its members are not Christian. We have difficulty understanding why anyone could accept and promote an idea that is so far from the truth." I doesn't sound like he's just talking about your version of Christianity. He never makes a distinction between different versions of Christianity.
If he was saying 'This is what our version of Christianity is,' then it would make sense. But he seems to be saying 'This is what a Christian is.'
So if it's required, then wouldn't that mean I'm not a Christian because I haven't been baptized for the remission of my sins?

Pettiness is part of those who objected the Plan of Salvation from the beginning only to be saved to come forth in this world and still object the plan overall. ^_^

john doe · October 16, 2009

How many times have you heard or read something claiming Mormons aren't Christians? Out of those, how many insist Mormons stop calling themselves Christians? I haven't read any that do so.

You don't get out much, do you?

When you say you believe the LDS church is the only church with full gospel, are you insisting I leave my church and join yours?

Only if you want the fullness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If you're happy with the little portion you have now, then feel free to stick with it. And if you still want to be called a Christian, that's fine by me. I'll let Christ be the final judge on that score.

Seminarysnoozer · October 16, 2009

Haven't we already been on this merry-go-round? I could promise I thought we just finished up a thread on what a Christian is according to LDS and other faiths. I love horses....don't like seeing them beaten.

Yes, I agree. I have a hard time understanding why the designation "Christian" is more important to some than following the teachings of Christ. That's almost like asking if we are all Muslim, because doesn't "Muslim" mean follower of God? At judgment day, God will not use the term "Christian" or "Muslim" or "Mormon" or "Pentecostal." In all the days of going to LDS church, I cannot remember one lesson on striving to be labeled by the world as "Christian." Yes, there are leaders of the church that try to clarify what is is to be Christian but what I am trying to say is the label "Christian" has nothing to do with the gospel, its just an earthly label. In the end, whether you group people with the term or divide people with the term, it makes no difference to God.

Hemidakota · October 16, 2009

[JohnDoe] Excellent posting...

john doe · October 16, 2009

Haven't we already been on this merry-go-round? I could promise I thought we just finished up a thread on what a Christian is according to LDS and other faiths. I love horses....don't like seeing them beaten.

What about cows? :rolleyes:

Misshalfway · October 16, 2009

I wanted to talk about this issue because I've seen many cases of LDS getting annoyed, or even offended, when they hear claims that Mormons aren't Christians. From what I've seen, many of those problems are caused by unclear wording from the Protestant side and misunderstandings on the LDS side. So I want to talk to you guys about it to get a better idea of how to word things as well as help clear up any misunderstandings you may have.
But you do say the LDS church is the only church with the full gospel. When people claim Mormons aren't Christians, they're making the same basic claim as you do when you say you're the only church with the full gospel. They're not saying you don't have faith in Christ and they're not saying you're not trying to follow Him. They're saying your gospel is missing some essential elements.
I'm not trying to deceive you at all. I just want to get a better understanding of what you believe about being a Christian.
How can two groups who contradict each other on the basics of Christ's teachings both be Christians? How can they both be following Christ when they're beliefs are going down different paths?

So.......you are disturbed because religious groups don't agree with each other about doctrine?

Well, gosh! That has been happening since the beginning of man! And I guess all I have to say about that is SO WHAT? So.....we don't agree on doctrine. Ok....so what does that mean? That we can't respect each other or learn from each other? What good is there in saying who can or can't be a Christian? Wasn't it Jesus who tried to bring together all the factions as he established his gospel?

It honestly sounds like what you are saying is that Mormons are hypocrites because we say we want to be Christians yet we supposedly condemn all other Christian demoninations. Is that your beef? Well, if that is your criteria for being a hypocrite then you must not understand protestantism very well because the whole basis of the movement was saying another group was wrong!

The truth is you admit you don't believe in baptism. Ok. That is your choice. It is pretty clear to me Christ himself was baptised and that he told the twelve to baptise the world. To me, its clear that baptism is part of the Christian deal. But if you don't, then that is between you and God. Who am I to make a judgment?

The best way I can describe how LDS people see the rest of the world is that we see everyone as children of God and that each is making his/her own choices with regards to eternal truth. God will judge and sort it all out.

lattelady · October 16, 2009

JohnDoe,

Your post #53 is kindof revealing to me. As I said, the issue of semantics on the word "Christian" is what is being hashed out in this thread. When you say to someone, "If you're happy with the little portion [of the gospel] that you have now," I would feel as though you're saying I'm less than a Christian. How can I be a true Christian and have just a little portion of the Gospel? I either believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ is true and accept it for ME (and I do and have)--thus having the full gospel, or I don't. It seems as though you're saying I'm not quite a Christian.

Edited October 16, 2009 by lattelady

Jamie123 · October 16, 2009

JohnDoe,
Your post #53 is kindof revealing to me. As I said, the issue of semantics on the word "Christian" is what is being hashed out in this thread. When you say to someone, "If you're happy with the little portion [of the gospel] that you have now," I would feel as though you're saying I'm less than a Christian. How can I be a true Christian and have just a little portion of the Gospel? I either believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ is true and accept it for ME (and I do and have)--thus having the full gospel, or I don't. It seems as though you're saying I'm only a partial Christian.

I think there's very much a difference of viewpoints here. Traditionally most non-LDS Christians see salvation as a bipolar all-or-nothing concept. You are either under God's grace (in which case you are a Christian) or else you are not, and the concept of a "partial Christian" is disallowed. Mormonism by contrast has a wide spectrum of different levels of salvation. Whatever you believe in yourself, you need to appreciate the other person's worldview before you can appreciate what he/she is saying.

This goes for Mormons too: Mormons claim they have the fullness of the Gospel, and that they are a restoration of Christ's original Church. But it is only the Mormons themselves who believe this, and it is pointless for any Mormon apologist to base his/her arguments on this premise.

john doe · October 16, 2009

JohnDoe,
Your post #53 is kindof revealing to me. As I said, the issue of semantics on the word "Christian" is what is being hashed out in this thread. When you say to someone, "If you're happy with the little portion [of the gospel] that you have now," I would feel as though you're saying I'm less than a Christian. How can I be a true Christian and have just a little portion of the Gospel? I either believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ is true and accept it for ME (and I do and have)--thus having the full gospel, or I don't. It seems as though you're saying I'm not quite a Christian.

Picking nits again are we? Or are you just trying really hard to be offended?

Yes, LDS believe we have the fullness of the gospel, we believe in and practice things that most other Christians don't. We believe that many plain and precious things had been lost over the centuries and that they were restored after Joseph Smith had his first vision. We believe that through our living Prophets we will receive more plain and precious truths and the will of our Lord, Jesus Christ, will be revealed to us as He sees fit to reveal them to us.

Yes, we feel we and our religion have something to offer to the world, and we feel that our religion is truly headed by Jesus Christ. We aren't saying that other religions don't have any truth, we are saying that we have more truth to add to the mix, that has been revealed to us by Jesus Himself.

If you feel that makes what you believe and do as "less Christian", that's okay, I won't judge you any less for it, and you're welcome to join us if you feel so inclined. It's okay, there's lots of people who have joined our church because they realized their current religion just wasn't enough. In fact, I'd venture to say that one of the reasons you come here to poke holes is because you see deficiencies in your own beliefs. You want to see if we can answer your questions better than what your current belief system does. And that's okay as long as you stay within the site rules.

lattelady · October 16, 2009

JohnDoe,

You've been rude, in general, to me since I've been on this site. That aside, there are others who will answer questions without the snide comments and presumptions. Your mean venture that I'm here to "poke holes" because I see deficiencies in my own beliefs is right in line with how you've treated me since I joined lds.net. To question my faith or claim I see deficiencies doesn't seem like something you have any right to claim, nor is it kind. Again though, it's been your M.O. since I became a member. But I've stayed within site rules as far as I know.

OneEternalSonata · October 16, 2009

Aren't we all short of exercising the "full gospel" in our lives? I believe in the Savior, that he was resurrected, and that he lives. All of the gospel has a fullness in Him. My journey to 'come unto him' will not be done until I am in his presence. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is perfect because I believe God has authorized it alone to house all blessings of the Gospel. Do I think that He doesn't teach or lead people in other churches? No.

Heavenly Father has to 'dumb down' the Gospel for everyone. He teaches us where we are in our progression. Thus, I believe that any who seek Christ are farther along in that journey than someone who doesn't. People live in varying degrees of harmony with the Gospel, yet even those who live in even the smallest degree are Christian. In or out of the Church.

Edited October 16, 2009 by OneEternalSonata

john doe · October 16, 2009

JohnDoe,
You've been rude, in general, to me since I've been on this site. That aside, there are others who will answer questions without the snide comments and presumptions. Your mean venture that I'm here to "poke holes" because I see deficiencies in my own beliefs is right in line with how you've treated me since I joined lds.net. To question my faith or claim I see deficiencies doesn't seem like something you have any right to claim, nor is it kind. Again though, it's been your M.O. since I became a member. But I've stayed within site rules as far as I know.

Yet you have come here to question our faith, tried to show our deficiencies, and nitpick when we tell you our beliefs. You picked out a small portion of my post and decided to make a show of being offended, claimed that I said you are not a Christian. I said no such thing. You make wide-sweeping claims all over this site about how we treat people who are not of our faith, claim we run non-members out of business among other things, yet when we explain, dispute those claims or ask for specific information you claim we are attacking you. You were eager to come in and jump on the bandwagon when Rider came in here and attempted to claim that LDS think that non-LDS are not Christians, and I can see it hurt you when we debunked that myth. Sorry, if you can't stand people defending their faith, then quit attacking it.

ryanh · October 16, 2009

Ironic isn't it? On a thread about the definition of 'who is Christian', the discussion would turn to contention and a spitting contest?

Clearly, we all (me included) fall short of being Christ-like. The question in my mind is whether or not we are trying all we can to follow that Example, and become like Him.

Hope we call all show each other Christian fruits rather than peddle semantics and derisions.

By their fruits ye shall know them . . .

john doe · October 16, 2009

Hey, even Jesus got mad enough to clear the temple of the moneychangers.

ryanh · October 16, 2009

And gentle enough to heal those that could not see rather than condemn them. And gentle and loving enough to tell the adulteress to "go, and sin no more" afer he called out her accusers.

When we seek to justify ourselves, it usually is clear, we already know we are in the wrong.

Just so happens that I happened to read a few words of Pres Hinckley yesterday in relation to anger and Jesus' actions in the temple:

The scriptures tell us that Jesus drove the moneychangers from the temple, saying, “My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves” (Matthew 21:13).
But even this was spoken more as a rebuke than as an outburst of uncontrolled anger.

Certainly, He held Himself to a higher standard while carrying out the necessary cleansing. I believe that Talmage has quite a bit to say about this episode as well, and I don't recall ever feeling justified in not acting as Christ-like as I could when I read that.

pam · October 16, 2009

I also think we have been taught that in the last days we will have to defend our faith. That we will have to stand up for what we believe even though the world around us is filled with hate. That there will be those that will mock our faith.

ryanh · October 16, 2009

we will have to stand up for what we believe

Of course. But, don't we also believe in treating ALL of our Brothers and Sisters, no matter what their persuasion (or even action - turn the other cheek, walk with him twain, etc) with a much compassion as we can muster? Or are we ala carte Christians? There are ways to declare we are Christians, and defend our faith without the fanfare that has occurred.

I believe there is an appropriate balance that, for now, is out of balance. It just doesn't feel right. And that is the measure where I felt the need to stand up, defend MY faith and my religion, that we can and ought to do better.

Can I have everyone's attention?

beefche · October 16, 2009

Are we done with the "we don't agree on the definition of Christian" conflict? Are we done with the "you're not acting what you are preaching" debate? Are we done with the "let's agree to disagree, but just one point" point?

Dove · October 16, 2009

I just wanted to say that I think I understand. I think that the word Christian might be a semantics issue at this point (at least in my mind). I hear you saying (many of the LDS posters) that there are many good Christian people in the world that aren't necessarily LDS. That clears up for ME the issue that being "Christian"--from a Mormon perspective-- may be more about believing in Jesus and living a moral, upright life--loving your neighbor, etc.; are you saying(PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong)that LDS members are Christians and that there are other Christians outside of the LDS church, but they are not considered LDS until some other covenants are made (like baptism and laying on of hands for receiving the Holy Ghost)?
The semantics for me is that the term Christian refers (in my belief system) to one who has put their faith in what Christ did for them on the cross as payment for their sin, and is trusting in that ALONE for salvation (not in any works that we can do); in light of that faith, they choose to live a life that is pleasing to God. So, while there may be many good people doing many good things and they may even believe IN Jesus, they still may not be a Christian unless they've put their trust in His work for them, His death on a cross.
I'm not here trying to belittle your faith, or mock you or demean you in any way. I appreciate the fact that you let me on this forum; it is an LDS forum. I am your guest, and I hope to be respectful and kind. If I've ever been anything other than that, it's not been my intention. Thanks for allowing me to be on here, to learn and share.

Lattelady,

Thank you for your sincere efforts to work this through. I do not feel you are here to antagonize other LDS people for their beliefs....this thread shows to me you are truly interested in understanding the differences in what we believe. Much appreciated.

I hope you are aware that the LDS community is hurting because we are so often attacked by other "mainstream" (for lack of a better word) christian religions.....I believe we feel ostracized from the christian community in general...and it smarts. I myself have been quite persecuted by my in-laws, and have heard criticism many times of my religion by their congregation, because I am LDS. I first became aware of how much antagonism there can be towards the LDS people at the onset of my mission. I served in Washington state, which arguably could be the "anti-mormon" capitol of the nation.

It's hard not to be understood by other religions, to be maligned and flat out slandered. So much of the critical information given by people denigrating our religion is not true. It's difficult not to be given a fair chance or valid platform......but, so it is. This is not to say that is your intent here.

I agree with you concerning JohnDoe. He is rather sharp in his words and has a narrow attitude towards anyone he perceives even disagrees with our beliefs. JohnDoe, I'm not trying to offend you. Please kindly consider the possible truth in our words. You do seem defensive and quick to "pull the trigger" so to speak in your conversation towards others.....

Lattelady, I would invite you to read the many verses in the Book of Mormon that expressly say that without Jesus Christ and his atonement for us, we would all be lost, regardless of all our "efforting." Here is one of the many verses given concerning the need for the atonement in the Book of Mormon:

7 Wherefore, it must needs be an ainfinite batonement—save it should be an infinite atonement this corruption could not put on incorruption. Wherefore, the cfirst judgment which came upon man must needs have dremained to an endless duration. And if so, this flesh must have laid down to rot and to crumble to its mother earth, to rise no more.

8 O the awisdom of God, his bmercy and cgrace! For behold, if the dflesh should rise no more our spirits must become subject to that angel who efell from before the presence of the Eternal God, and became the fdevil, to rise no more.

9 And our spirits must have become alike unto him, and we become devils, bangels to a cdevil, to be dshut out from the presence of our God, and to remain with the father of elies, in misery, like unto himself; yea, to that being who fbeguiled our first parents, who gtransformeth himself nigh unto an hangel of light, and istirreth up the children of men unto jsecret combinations of murder and all manner of secret works of darkness.

10 O how great the agoodness of our God, who prepareth a way for our bescape from the grasp of this awful monster; yea, that monster, cdeath and dhell, which I call the death of the body, and also the death of the spirit.

To me this is very clear as to our need for the atonement.

There are so many blessings we believe will be given us though, that are hingent upon wether we "put our money where our mouth is" in following the Saviour and His teachings...It is not enough to simply say we believe in Christ and His sufferings on the cross for us. It is necessary to show our faith in this through our works. "Faith without works is dead," according to even the Bible.

One way I look at it that helps me understand that requirement of our best efforts to obtain the presence of the Saviour and God, the Father is the following. When Christ suffered on the cross for us, taking our sins upon Him, He gave all that He had to the Father, to save and redeem us. He did all he could for our salvation. He gave everything. While we, as mortals, are fallen/broken/lost in our natural state without His atonement; still, the Father requires the same offering from us to warrant His presence. That we give Him/the Saviour all that we have and are in becoming more like Him and coming back into His presence.

I just wanted to clarify something. The atonement provides immortality to the whole of humankind as a free gift. All of us will be resurrected at the last day. All will receive a glorifed, immortal, perfect body at the last day.

For us, returning to live in God's presence, what we call "Eternal Life," is hingent on whether or not we accept Jesus Christ as our Saviour and Redeemer, and give all to live according to His gospel......

I hope this helps and makes sense a little more our beliefs on this.

Dove · October 16, 2009