DiscussMormonism.com

I have a few coworkers who are Mormon, though they seem to be very pragmatic about their beliefs, and I am seeking some insight on Mormonism. I hold Reformed Christian beliefs which are based on the five solas of the reformation: Scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone, Christ alone, and God’s glory alone. This drives my worldview perspective by using the Bible as my standard to view everything in life through. I’d like to get a clearer idea of what makes up a Mormon worldview to contrast with Christianity. What are the basic tenants and beliefs which make up Mormonism?

Hi, Mormons believe that based upon the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ we may receive forgiveness and with the Holy Ghost grow to become like God.

pgm1985 wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 08, 2024 3:13 pm

I have a few coworkers who are Mormon, though they seem to be very pragmatic about their beliefs, and I am seeking some insight on Mormonism. I hold Reformed Christian beliefs which are based on the five solas of the reformation: Scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone, Christ alone, and God’s glory alone. This drives my worldview perspective by using the Bible as my standard to view everything in life through. I’d like to get a clearer idea of what makes up a Mormon worldview to contrast with Christianity. What are the basic tenants and beliefs which make up Mormonism?

Good to hear that your experience was that your Mormon coworkers are pragmatic about their beliefs. I've found many Mormons pedantic about their beliefs.

Mormons view grace as one of two elements for forgiveness, the other being that one must earn it through repentance and good works.

sock puppet wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 08, 2024 3:42 pm

pgm1985 wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 08, 2024 3:13 pm

I have a few coworkers who are Mormon, though they seem to be very pragmatic about their beliefs, and I am seeking some insight on Mormonism. I hold Reformed Christian beliefs which are based on the five solas of the reformation: Scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone, Christ alone, and God’s glory alone. This drives my worldview perspective by using the Bible as my standard to view everything in life through. I’d like to get a clearer idea of what makes up a Mormon worldview to contrast with Christianity. What are the basic tenants and beliefs which make up Mormonism?

Mormons view grace as one of two elements for forgiveness, the other being that one must earn it through repentance and good works.

Sock Puppet, pgm will believe repentance is necessary. I think the word "earn" is very ambiguous, creating confusion. I checked the church website, finding this:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/com ... -of-Mormon

Everyone can repent. It can be difficult to make changes, but it’s possible with the Lord’s help. In the Book of Mormon, the prophet Nephi taught that when the Lord commands us to do something, He also provides a way to do it: “The Lord giveth no commandments unto the children of men, save he shall prepare a way for them that they may accomplish the thing which he commandeth them” (1 Nephi 3:7). God will help you as you strive to sincerely follow these principles of repentance.

Have faith

As we believe in Jesus and His power to cleanse and forgive us, we are able to “exercise [our] faith unto repentance” (Alma 34:17). Have faith that Jesus can free you from sin.

I do not see earning forgiveness here but I can see how things feel that way. There have been folks with five solas who work very hard at the repentance thing. Well, perhaps there are folks who do not as much.

You’ll discover Mormonism doesn’t have a system of theology. It has a system of revelation.

Nearly every core Mormon doctrine has been changed, and is still changing. Ad-hoc justifications and rationalizations abound. The closest thing to a professional Mormon theologian is Robert Boylan, an incel who has a collection of 12,000 disjointed blog posts at his Scriptural Mormonism website. It’s a clown show.

The only Mormon worldview is that they follow the brethren.

drumdude wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 08, 2024 4:21 pm

You’ll discover Mormonism doesn’t have a system of theology. It has a system of revelation.

Nearly every core Mormon doctrine has been changed, and is still changing. Ad-hoc justifications and rationalizations abound. The closest thing to a professional Mormon theologian is Robert Boylan, an incel who has a collection of 12,000 disjointed blog posts at his Scriptural Mormonism website. It’s a clown show.

The only Mormon worldview is that they follow the brethren.

Drumdude, you present a picture decidedly at odds with what I learned and experienced. I find I do respect that there actually are different experiences. Your real experience and mine may well differ. As this is public discussion I find myself questioning your characterization.

I see little change in doctrine since the first decade of the church when it was in some flux. I wonder what sort of things you are thinking of. When was there an alteration (not just a minor addition) to the Doctrine and Covenants? I can think of changes in policy or emphasis but I do not see much change in basic doctrine.

It is true that there is no systematic theology and you have a point in calling it a system of revelation. The church does not try to systematically derive all doctrines from Bible statements.

In LDS terms I think the apostles would all be professional theologians. Robert Boylan would not count at all.

huckelberry wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:29 pm

In LDS terms I think the apostles would all be professional theologians. Robert Boylan would not count at all.

I agree the LDS church wants to present the apostles as theologians but they aren’t.

You need only compare and contrast the ways that Catholics and Protestants do theology to the way Mormons do. Catholics and Protestants train in theology. They spend considerable amounts of time and resources into it. They write books about it.

Conference talks are the Potemkin version of this.

Case in point: Bruce R McConkie’s Mormon Doctrine. The church no longer publishes it because it was a fool's errand to even attempt to outline Mormon doctrine. So much of the book is outdated or wrong that it’s borderline embarrassing for the current apostles.

The only un-changing doctrine is that you follow the brethren.

drumdude wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:54 pm

huckelberry wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:29 pm

In LDS terms I think the apostles would all be professional theologians. Robert Boylan would not count at all.

I agree the LDS church wants to present the apostles as theologians but they aren’t.

You need only compare and contrast the ways that Catholics and Protestants do theology to the way Mormons do. Catholics and Protestants train in theology. They spend considerable amounts of time and resources into it. They write books about it.

Conference talks are the Potemkin version of this.

Case in point: Bruce R McConkie’s Mormon Doctrine. The church no longer publishes it because it was a fool's errand to even attempt to outline Mormon doctrine. So much of the book is outdated or wrong that it’s borderline embarrassing for the current apostles.

The only un-changing doctrine is that you follow the brethren.

drumdude, I realize that there are years of study for Protestant of Catholic theologians. They have to get some grasp of the evolution of thinking and the multiple various paths that have taken over some two thousand years. Just think of what a Herculean task it is to take the Bible with its complexity and then the centuries of church history and from that complex tangle render out something as odd as five solas (or anything close to stable doctrine). No, LDS apostles have no need for such tasks. Why would they, what point would it serve?

I am still in the dark about significant doctrinal changes in the last 160 years.

There is variety and change in Catholic and Protestant thinking. In comparison LDS looks pretty stable, but of course it has had a much shorter time for change.

1. Obedience to Church Authorities by following the administrative hierarchy.

2. The tithing must flow.

3. Secrets must be kept.

huckelberry wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 08, 2024 6:32 pm

drumdude wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 08, 2024 5:54 pm

I agree the LDS church wants to present the apostles as theologians but they aren’t.

You need only compare and contrast the ways that Catholics and Protestants do theology to the way Mormons do. Catholics and Protestants train in theology. They spend considerable amounts of time and resources into it. They write books about it.

Conference talks are the Potemkin version of this.

Case in point: Bruce R McConkie’s Mormon Doctrine. The church no longer publishes it because it was a fool's errand to even attempt to outline Mormon doctrine. So much of the book is outdated or wrong that it’s borderline embarrassing for the current apostles.

The only un-changing doctrine is that you follow the brethren.

drumdude, I realize that there are years of study for Protestant of Catholic theologians. They have to get some grasp of the evolution of thinking and the multiple various paths that have taken over some two thousand years. Just think of what a Herculean task it is to take the Bible with its complexity and then the centuries of church history and from that complex tangle render out something as odd as five solas (or anything close to stable doctrine). No, LDS apostles have no need for such tasks. Why would they, what point would it serve?

I am still in the dark about significant doctrinal changes in the last 160 years.

There is variety and change in Catholic and Protestant thinking. In comparison LDS looks pretty stable, but of course it has had a much shorter time for change.

They were left to reconcile the whimsical musings of Joseph Smith and his successors with those 2,000 years of history. God as a man, polygamy as the new and everlasting covenant, Adam as God, priesthood ban, etc.

The nature of God as a man who himself had a God who was a man is an extremely significant change to Christianity. Mormons have done a fantastic job disguising it as some small issue, though.

There’s a reason the modern apostles no longer reveal anything. They don’t want to risk making the theological mess any worse than it already is.