Thoughts (part 1)

[Jamie123]

For a while I've been thinking about untangling as systematically as I can some of the fundamental questions I've had about the Mormon faith, how it differs from my own religious traditions and why I've always been drawn by it but never been able to accept it. Before you dismiss this as an attempt to "bash" Mormonism, please read the whole thing. My aim is merely to put down my thoughts as honestly as I can - about Mormonism and about the alternative "traditional" Christianity.

Just two points before I begin: My "thoughts" here may not sound very original, but I'm trying to set out the fundamentals in a systematic way as groundwork for what's to come. Secondly, before you tell me to stop thinking about it and go pray the Moroni prayer, I'll come to my thoughts on that in due course. This is just my first offering....

Question 1: What is the true relationship between Mormonism and Christianity, and do the two overlap?

Many Christians seem not to recognize Mormons as Christians because:

1. All “true” Christians believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, as laid out in the Nicene and Athenasian creeds. Mormons do not believe in this doctrine and are therefore not true Christians.

2. Mormons believe in salvation through works, while the Bible teaches that salvation is by faith alone.

3. “True” Christians believe the Bible is sufficient and complete. Mormons believe the Bible to have been corrupted and no longer reliable, and have introduced new “scriptures” to fill the gaps.

4. What Joseph Smith taught is (so they claim) demonstrably false. Worse still he claimed to teach it in the name of God, calling himself a prophet. Anything built upon such falsehood and deception must be bad.

Now how valid are these claims? Let’s take them one by one…

1. What do we mean by “The Trinity”? Basically it’s a compaction of tri-unity, or “three in one”. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are “One God”. The Bible does suggest the three are united, but could this not mean “united in common purpose” rather than “of one substance”?

2. "Faith alone" is certainly the picture we get from Paul’s Letter to the Romans, but other parts of the Bible (particularly the Letter to the Hebrews) suggest that works are needed as well as faith. “Sola fide” explains this away with something like “works are an outgrowth of faith” and “no truly good works without prior salvation through faith”, but this has a ring of speculation about it. Couldn’t faith be just as easily an “outgrowth” of truly good works?

3. I’ve never totally understood “sola scriptura”. The assumption that God’s Word (i.e. the Bible) is infallible seems to be the starting point of many theologians’ arguments, and never seems to be properly justified. I’ve always yearned for some proof that would make the Bible the bedrock it’s claimed to be, but nothing seems to be forthcoming. Some will say I lack faith, or have too much sin in my life to see the obvious truth. Well maybe that’s true – I don’t know.

4. While it’s hard to prove for a fact that Joseph Smith was a real prophet, it seems equally difficult to prove that he wasn’t. The strongest anti-Mormon arguments still have chinks in them that their supporters brush over. Unlikely as it may seem, we cannot totally ignore the possibility that Smith really was a prophet! And if he was then Mormons have (if anything) a better claim to be “true Christians” than the “true Christians”.

So assuming for the moment that Mormonism is true, what actually is the status of the other Churches? Do Catholics, Anglicans, Baptists etc, still have a claim to call themselves Christians? (This is actually a very important question, as I will attempt to show later on.) The standard Mormon answer I’ve received is “Yes!” quickly followed by “So that clears up that question so…blahdy blah blah…onto something else.”

Except it doesn’t clear it up at all. Let me explain why….

For starters, “Christian” is a difficult word to define, and cross-purpose conversations easy arise. To some it means “A person who professes a belief in Jesus Christ” – which seems to be the main justification Mormons use for labelling themselves Christians.

Evangelical-type: “You’re not real Christians!”

Mormon: “What do you mean? Of course we’re real Christians! For goodness sake, we have ‘Jesus Christ’ in the very name of our Church!”

This answer fails to impress the Evangelical-type because he uses the word in a different sense: To him “Christian” means “A sinner put right with God through the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ” and not everyone who sticks the label of Christ on himself will necessarily fall into this category.

Now what are some of the implications? If the Mormon Gospel is true then faithful Mormons obviously are recipients of God’s favour through Christ, and therefore are Christians in the Evangelical-type’s sense. This brings us back to the so-easily-dismissed question: “Are other Christians really ‘Christians’?”

Before we go any further let’s examine two further differences between the Mormon and the Evangelical-type: Firstly, while the latter considers the former’s religion to be fundamentally wrong, the former is free to believe that the latter may be partly right. His “gospel” may have important parts of it missing, and his Church’s priesthood (or equivalent) may not carry the true authority of Christ, but what it does have may be good and helpful for salvation. Secondly the very concept of “salvation” differs between the Mormon and the Evangelical-type: To the latter it’s all or nothing. Heaven or hell. Salvation or eternal damnation - which in his vocabulary means (at best) non-existence and (at worst) something unimaginably nasty going on for ever. Mormonism if I understand it rightly presents a finely graded system of future states into which the soul can eventually settle - the lowest of which is preferable to our present life - plus something called “Outer Darkness” (not unlike the Evangelical-type’s concept of hell, but only for a small minority). “Salvation” to the Mormon means reaching the highest level, while “damnation” merely means failing to reach it. Most people – including unrepentant murderers, rapists and child molesters - will achieve some kind of “heaven” at the end, though the road may be long and hard.

So given this picture, it’s easy to see how a Mormon might consider a non-Mormon to be on track for a high-ish place in heaven (and therefore arguably still a Christian in the Evangelical-type’s sense) through following that portion of the “true” Gospel taught by his own church - through the “difference” will need to be made up through ordinances performed by Mormons after his death.

**

Anyway, hopefully I'll find some time soon to continue this there are several other "questions" to be addressed. Please give me any comments ytou have - I would be very interested to hear them.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Jamie123

[Traveler]

I found your comments interesting. I use to work with a lay Buddhist monk. We had many discussions about religion and theology. One of the “Things” I learned from him concerned meditation which he defined as “becoming aware”. One of the questions that he asks me was about “my thoughts”. He once asked me what thought are really mine and which are placed in my mind by other sources.

As I have explored “my thoughts” I have discovered that some are not mine and other I am not sure. Over time I have learned to decipher my thoughts as those that are inspired or encourage by holy sources and those inspired by corrupt or unholy sources.

Concerning who are the “real” Christians. Jesus taught some strong principles.

One such principle is that his “sheep” are discerned by their fruits – not their doctrine. In his parable of the Good Samaritan we learn that we are to understand Christ and Christianity not by doctrine (represented in the parable by the Priest and Levite) but compassion for those fallen and in need. Jesus use the most despised of all peoples to the Jews by indicating a Samaritan can be greater than a Priest or Levite by having true compassion despite the fact that the Samaritan religion was corrupt.

The Traveler

[captmoroniRM]

Try spending some time reading through articles on The Society for the Prevention of Anti-Mormonism. There are plenty of articles that are geared towards these questions. It would take a lot of time to give a detailed and adequate response to all the questions and points you raised. Try reading through some of those and see if you can find explanations that may help.

[jayanna]

I believe I am a true Christian. I do know that Heavenly Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are three separate beings who are one in purpose. LDS.org - Ensign Article - The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost I do belive the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly. I do not believe that the Book of Mormon is more important than the Bible. FAQ | Mormon.org I know that Joseph Smith was a prophet, I know that Thomas S. Monson is the prophet today. I say I know because I prayed and recieved a definitive answer to those prayers. I also know because I have lived those principles taught to me, and found that they bear good fruits.

My Savior, Jesus Christ, took on all of my sins, and redeemed me from the Fall of Adam. He is my true Savior and only through His teachings and His sacrifice am I going to be found worthy to live with my Father again. I do not do good works because I'm trying to earn a kingdom. I do them because through Christ I am able to love my brothers and sisters, and because I would do these things for Him. He loves me and I want to show him that I love Him, too.

I am not really worried about if other people are Christians...can we really tell? There are some members of my faith who are not what they claim to be, there are some members of other faiths that are not what they claim to be. I would not attempt to condemn them, Jesus came into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. . .

Luke 18

10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.

11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.

12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.

14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

Jesus did, however, give us some instruction on how to tell .... by this shall men know if ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. By this simple phrase, Jesus has divided those that simply claim to be disciples from those that truly are.

Edited October 14, 2010 by jayanna

[Blackmarch]

For a while I've been thinking about untangling as systematically as I can some of the fundamental questions I've had about the Mormon faith, how it differs from my own religious traditions and why I've always been drawn by it but never been able to accept it. Before you dismiss this as an attempt to "bash" Mormonism, please read the whole thing. My aim is merely to put down my thoughts as honestly as I can - about Mormonism and about the alternative "traditional" Christianity.

Just two points before I begin: My "thoughts" here may not sound very original, but I'm trying to set out the fundamentals in a systematic way as groundwork for what's to come. Secondly, before you tell me to stop thinking about it and go pray the Moroni prayer, I'll come to my thoughts on that in due course. This is just my first offering....

Here's how I generally respond to such ;

Question 1: What is the true relationship between Mormonism and Christianity, and do the two overlap?

There are many parallels, depending on who you talk to outside of mormondom, it'll be yes they are shared points or they are forgeries (usually the half a truth type) done by the devil to decieve people who would go to christ otherwise....

Many Christians seem not to recognize Mormons as Christians because:

1. All “true” Christians believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, as laid out in the Nicene and Athenasian creeds. Mormons do not believe in this doctrine and are therefore not true Christians.

I do not accept the nicea or athanesia creeds. they are not my Christ, nor has the spirit let me know that i should accept them, so I do not. I follow Christ, the one whom the Bible revolves around, as best as I can and as I have been lead by the spirit - if another wishes to exercise their judgement in condemning that by saying I have not then that condemnation will be upon their heads when we meet before God. What another says I care not for they are not Christ, God, or the Spirit - unless its revealed to me that I should follow them.

2. Mormons believe in salvation through works, while the Bible teaches that salvation is by faith alone.

This is an inaccurate view from outside the LDS faith. With the LDS, Faith and works are so intertwined that you cannot have one without the other- if you remove one the other becomes false.

3. “True” Christians believe the Bible is sufficient and complete. Mormons believe the Bible to have been corrupted and no longer reliable, and have introduced new “scriptures” to fill the gaps.

This is only half true. Mormons do not believe that the Bible is the totality of God's word, but that many parts are still reliable (otherwise we would not have it as part of our canon).

4. What Joseph Smith taught is (so they claim) demonstrably false. Worse still he claimed to teach it in the name of God, calling himself a prophet. Anything built upon such falsehood and deception must be bad.

In my experience 90+% of the "demonstratably false" stuff tends either to turn out not to be, or not able to be proven either way, and the other 10% tend to be things he supposed or personally belived but wasn't revealed or taught as revelation...

is how I generally respond to such questions/comments.

Now how valid are these claims? Let’s take them one by one…

1. What do we mean by “The Trinity”? Basically it’s a compaction of tri-unity, or “three in one”. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are “One God”. The Bible does suggest the three are united, but could this not mean “united in common purpose” rather than “of one substance”?

2. "Faith alone" is certainly the picture we get from Paul’s Letter to the Romans, but other parts of the Bible (particularly the Letter to the Hebrews) suggest that works are needed as well as faith. “Sola fide” explains this away with something like “works are an outgrowth of faith” and “no truly good works without prior salvation through faith”, but this has a ring of speculation about it. Couldn’t faith be just as easily an “outgrowth” of truly good works?

3. I’ve never totally understood “sola scriptura”. The assumption that God’s Word (i.e. the Bible) is infallible seems to be the starting point of many theologians’ arguments, and never seems to be properly justified. I’ve always yearned for some proof that would make the Bible the bedrock it’s claimed to be, but nothing seems to be forthcoming. Some will say I lack faith, or have too much sin in my life to see the obvious truth. Well maybe that’s true – I don’t know.

4. While it’s hard to prove for a fact that Joseph Smith was a real prophet, it seems equally difficult to prove that he wasn’t. The strongest anti-Mormon arguments still have chinks in them that their supporters brush over. Unlikely as it may seem, we cannot totally ignore the possibility that Smith really was a prophet! And if he was then Mormons have (if anything) a better claim to be “true Christians” than the “true Christians”.

So assuming for the moment that Mormonism is true, what actually is the status of the other Churches? Do Catholics, Anglicans, Baptists etc, still have a claim to call themselves Christians? (This is actually a very important question, as I will attempt to show later on.) The standard Mormon answer I’ve received is “Yes!” quickly followed by “So that clears up that question so…blahdy blah blah…onto something else.”

Except it doesn’t clear it up at all. Let me explain why….

For starters, “Christian” is a difficult word to define, and cross-purpose conversations easy arise. To some it means “A person who professes a belief in Jesus Christ” – which seems to be the main justification Mormons use for labelling themselves Christians.

Evangelical-type: “You’re not real Christians!”

Mormon: “What do you mean? Of course we’re real Christians! For goodness sake, we have ‘Jesus Christ’ in the very name of our Church!”

This answer fails to impress the Evangelical-type because he uses the word in a different sense: To him “Christian” means “A sinner put right with God through the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ” and not everyone who sticks the label of Christ on himself will necessarily fall into this category.

Now what are some of the implications? If the Mormon Gospel is true then faithful Mormons obviously are recipients of God’s favour through Christ, and therefore are Christians in the Evangelical-type’s sense. This brings us back to the so-easily-dismissed question: “Are other Christians really ‘Christians’?”

Before we go any further let’s examine two further differences between the Mormon and the Evangelical-type: Firstly, while the latter considers the former’s religion to be fundamentally wrong, the former is free to believe that the latter may be partly right. His “gospel” may have important parts of it missing, and his Church’s priesthood (or equivalent) may not carry the true authority of Christ, but what it does have may be good and helpful for salvation. Secondly the very concept of “salvation” differs between the Mormon and the Evangelical-type: To the latter it’s all or nothing. Heaven or hell. Salvation or eternal damnation - which in his vocabulary means (at best) non-existence and (at worst) something unimaginably nasty going on for ever. Mormonism if I understand it rightly presents a finely graded system of future states into which the soul can eventually settle - the lowest of which is preferable to our present life - plus something called “Outer Darkness” (not unlike the Evangelical-type’s concept of hell, but only for a small minority). “Salvation” to the Mormon means reaching the highest level, while “damnation” merely means failing to reach it. Most people – including unrepentant murderers, rapists and child molesters - will achieve some kind of “heaven” at the end, though the road may be long and hard.

So given this picture, it’s easy to see how a Mormon might consider a non-Mormon to be on track for a high-ish place in heaven (and therefore arguably still a Christian in the Evangelical-type’s sense) through following that portion of the “true” Gospel taught by his own church - through the “difference” will need to be made up through ordinances performed by Mormons after his death.

**

Anyway, hopefully I'll find some time soon to continue this there are several other "questions" to be addressed. Please give me any comments ytou have - I would be very interested to hear them.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Blackmarch

[applepansy]

Secondly the very concept of “salvation” differs between the Mormon and the Evangelical-type: To the latter it’s all or nothing. Heaven or hell. Salvation or eternal damnation - which in his vocabulary means (at best) non-existence and (at worst) something unimaginably nasty going on for ever. Mormonism if I understand it rightly presents a finely graded system of future states into which the soul can eventually settle - the lowest of which is preferable to our present life - plus something called “Outer Darkness” (not unlike the Evangelical-type’s concept of hell, but only for a small minority). “Salvation” to the Mormon means reaching the highest level, while “damnation” merely means failing to reach it. Most people – including unrepentant murderers, rapists and child molesters - will achieve some kind of “heaven” at the end, though the road may be long and hard.

Jamie, the following talk might help you understand our beliefs regarding "being saved."

LDS.org - Ensign Article - Have You Been Saved?

Addition: My understanding is that one of the differences between Mormon and Evangelical beliefs are; Evangelicals believe in heaven and hell, end of story and Mormons believe in Spirit World (heaven) and Spirit Prison (hell) and then go further. We don't stop there. After a time and when all those in Spirit Prison have had the chance to hear the gospel of Jesus Christ and accept or reject it, then there will be the resurrection, judgement, and the next step in our progression, i.e., the three degrees of glory. I hope this helps.

Edited October 14, 2010 by applepansy

[Jamie123]

Thanks for all the feedback :) Things are chaotic in my life right now, but I'll hopefully get on to Parts 2 and 3 soon. There's a lot I want to get off my chest.

Blackmarch: I hope you don't think I was presenting those 4 statements as being what I think. I'm just quoting them as common examples of anti-Mormon arguments from other Christian groups - particularly evangelicals. Your responses to them are in some places eerily close to my own :)

[Traveler]

Thanks for all the feedback :) Things are chaotic in my life right now, but I'll hopefully get on to Parts 2 and 3 soon. There's a lot I want to get off my chest.

Blackmarch: I hope you don't think I was presenting those 4 statements as being what I think. I'm just quoting them as common examples of anti-Mormon arguments from other Christian groups - particularly evangelicals. Your responses to them are in some places eerily close to my own :)

I find the anti-LDS arguments eerily close to the anti-Christ arguments of 2000 years ago. Consider John 10:33 – “The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself G-d.”

Or the whole thing about LDS not being Christian. But since we are talking about Jews it was about not being a Jew – which would be the same as calling someone of the Jewish belief a Samaritan.

The Traveler

[rameumptom]

I think you honestly and carefully laid out your arguments pro and con.

Are Mormons or traditional Christians, "Christians"? In an all-or-nothing scheme of things, only one set of beliefs could save a person. Anything less than all-truth would leave us wanting and burning in hell. This is perhaps one of the biggest weaknesses of modern traditional Christianity.

The Bible (2 Cor 12:1-4), early Jewish-Christian writings, and LDS theology believe in multiple levels of heaven. In this scenario, people can be of any faith and receive a level of heaven based upon both faith and works. We are saved by basic faith alone from endless hell and torment and into a kingdom of glory. Our level of faith, faithfulness and works then determine the level of heaven we receive. So Baptists, Catholics, and Mormons can all be classified as Christian and go to heaven (or A level of heaven). This also opens the door for Christ to save even non-Christians into a level of heaven, based upon their goodness and faith in God according to the knowledge and understanding they had. Christ's atonement becomes near universal.

For LDS, there are two definitions of the term 'saved.' One means to be exalted, or receive the highest glory of heaven. The other means one is saved from Outer Darkness, an eternal hell devoid of any of God's glory or blessings.

[Faded]

Question 1: What is the true relationship between Mormonism and Christianity, and do the two overlap?

It's something I've devoted a lot of thought and prayer to, and here's the conclusions I've come to thus far.

1.) There was a Great Apostasy. The most important thing that was lost in Christianity's falling away was the keys to continual revelation.

2.) This left the remaining body of Christians groping in the dark looking for answers to questions. So they put together answers as best they could, but not via divine revelation. Sorting out answers based upon committees of religious leaders essentially voting on it, obviously led to a number of wrong answers.

3.) The Great Apostasy did not thwart the works of God. Since the ancient Christians either could not or would not receive the fullness of truth, God gave them what they were able to accept.

4.) This created a circumstance extremely similar to the time Israel spent under the Law of Moses. In the case of Christianity, the foundation to build on was still intact, even if the Church and Kingdom was not on the Earth.

5.) This incomplete form of Christianity spread throughout the world. This accomplished the will of God in preparing the world for the Restoration.

6.) With the fundamentals and foundational messages of God and Christ spread to every corner of the world, God called his prophet Joseph Smith and through him restored the Church and Kingdom of God on Earth -- the most important part being continual revelation from God.

So the shortened version is this: Traditional Christianity is the foundation upon which God always intended to re-build. That is why we say: Come and see what God has done. Bring your faith in God with you and let God's modern day message complete your faith and fulfill of what you already have received from Him.

That view of things doesn't leave much room for name-calling and telling people that they aren't Christians just because what they have is incomplete. Just because the narrow view of Evangelicals would define Evangelicals as "semi-Christian" at best and "non-Christian" at worst (according to their own narrow definition) is not important. We don't have to take the same narrow-minded approach to things. Indeed, devout Traditional Christians will receive everything they think they will receive: To live with Christ forever and to serve and praise Him for eternity. They will receive at least that much if they are true to what portion of truth they were willing to receive. But they could have received much much greater blessings, and that makes their rejection of truth a great tragedy.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Faded
cuz eye cann't spelle