Again, claiming that other Christians are not part of "the true Church of Jesus Christ," and here it's told with tacky pictures of ministers from other Christian denominations so that LDS children understand just which religions are the wrong ones. Are you okay with this, Simon?
I think this is more of a statement from a young organization trying to gain market share. Sort of "I am the truth and light" on an organizational scale. We couldn't use the expression, "new and improved" because the foundational story told of a restoration of that which was lost.
I think President Hinckley set the stage for a new interchange when he said, "bring us your truths and let's see what we can add to them". Truths must be extant for any additional understanding to be added.
Hoops wrote: Really? okay. Let me freshen it up for you. LDS claim to worship Christ is based on the historical Christ. In that, we're the same. But the God-Christ is significantly different and that violates a core Christian belief. Fresh enough?
Well now wait a minute... Where are any of the creeds found in the New Testament?
Not the point of the thread. for what it's worth, I have no problem LDS saying we're wrong and they're right. That's fine. My problem lies with LDS claiming they are just another Christian denomination.
Hoops wrote:for what it's worth, I have no problem LDS saying we're wrong and they're right. That's fine. My problem lies with LDS claiming they are just another Christian denomination.
Okay, but we don't claim that we are "just anther Christian denomination."
We aren't traditional (or the more accepted term creedal) Christians. We are Latter-day Saint Christians.
Simon Belmont wrote:If that were the case there would be no LDS Church.
There is.
And it's thriving.
that's not how it works. We are not talking about convincing everyone. The age of the Earth being much older then 1000's of years has been proven beyond resonable doubt, but we still have millions who will maintain unreasonable doubt due to strong bias to reject what conflicts with their cherished beliefs.
This is a tough question, and I’m sympathetic to both sides on the issue.
On one side, where Hoops and MsJack are, is the body of Christ (the Church) which stretches across vast denominational bounds, from Anglican, to Lutheran, to Dutch Reform, to Methodists, and even Roman Catholicism.
Now all these groups have fierce debates over quite a few doctrines, but they are essentially united in a set of core beliefs that center around the Triune Godhead. Like Hoops pointed out, if you start departing from the Godhead, you start changing important things, like Christ’s atoning death (which the LDS Church departs from, since LDS affirm that Christ’s atoning work wasn’t done on the cross).
On the Mormon side is an understandable frustration, nobody owns the word “Christian”, and any devoted follower of Christ should be able to claim the title and use it.
Only sometimes, Stak. Many protestant denominations and people do not recognize Catholicism as Christian. I know James White doesn't, and neither does Jack Chick.
There is nothing wrong or unethical about disagreeing with other groups or individuals beliefs privatelty or publically. This means in print or on the internet, etc. I would say they are crossing the line when if they are trying to do it in your home or at your groups meeting places. SB just wants to try and intimidate, if possible, others into silence.
Hoops wrote: Accepted by whom? Certainly not us. Just as we deny the teachings of LDS are Christian, you call us creedal Christians - what ever that is.
Sorry, MsJack once said that she preferred the term "creedal Christian" -- I assumed that was the accepted term. Traditional Christian, then?
