Mormonism is not "Christianity"

[_Hoops]

[u]

But I committed the one sin God cannot forgive. Disbelief.

No. You have not. There is no such sin. And, though Mr. Salmon is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy smarter than I, and Mr. Salmon is waaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyy more rhetoricaly nimble than I, I suspect he agrees. If he does not, then I disgaree with him.

[_Hoops]

Yes, you were saved, beastie.

Can we hug please?


(Shhhh.... please don't tell Beastie, I also think she is saved. Just between you and me it's fun to find that she is..... shhhhhh, here she comes. be cool)

[_Yoda]

Are we all just talking past each other?

This was my post on the bottom of page 15.

Who disagrees with my view here and why?

The definition of the word encompasses the doctrine accepted and the doctrine rejected.

I respectfully disagree.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary states the following for the primary definition of a Christian:

1. One who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ.

When I think of what a Christian is, this is the definition that first comes to mind. I don't immediately start parsing doctrinal tenets of my church, or any other church.

On the basis of the above definition, Mormons are, indeed, Christians.

[_cksalmon]

Yes, you were saved, beastie.

Beastie, I would only point out here that Jersey Girl apparently hopes to tickle your ear, for whatever reason. Personally, I have no such expectation and hope to do the exact opposite. Thereby, I hope we're being more rigorously honest with each other than her blithe commendation suggests.

[_Hoops]

I respectfully disagree.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary states the following for the primary definition of a Christian:

1. One who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ.

When I think of what a Christian is, this is the definition that first comes to mind. I don't immediately start parsing doctrinal tenets of my church, or any other church.

On the basis of the above definition, Mormons are, indeed, Christians.

[/quote]
I disagree. There is a reason why the Triune God is the only acceptable sacrifice. When that is changed into something else, something less, that is nonChristian. God spent 66 books telling us who He is, that is significant. It from there that we get doctrine, and doctrine is important. It's one way He communicates with us. Which is why I'm not troubled by doctrine that is developed over time. Perhaps, LDS doctrine will someday become orthodox, how would I know. That day is not today.

And that's not even addressing "belief in the teachings of..." I don't know what that means. Lots of people believe in those teaching I suspect.

Don't worry, I know I'm on your ignore list, so this is for anyone else who might be interested.

[_Yoda]

Um...persecution complex, anyone? Why do you think you're on my ignore list?

Keep up those type of ass-hole-ish comments and you might be.

So...the bottom line seems to be that you disagree with the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition on what a Christian is. Fair enough.

I think that the reason that most of us who are LDS are frustrated is that we, as a group on MDB can't even come to consensus as to what a common definition for a Christian is.

I don't really see how an intelligent discussion can ensue if we can't even decide on that.

I find it rather ironic that the definition laid out in the most renowned dictionary is not sufficient.

I respectfully disagree.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary states the following for the primary definition of a Christian:

1. One who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ.

When I think of what a Christian is, this is the definition that first comes to mind. I don't immediately start parsing doctrinal tenets of my church, or any other church.

On the basis of the above definition, Mormons are, indeed, Christians.

I disagree. There is a reason why the Triune God is the only acceptable sacrifice. When that is changed into something else, something less, that is nonChristian. God spent 66 books telling us who He is, that is significant. It from there that we get doctrine, and doctrine is important. It's one way He communicates with us. Which is why I'm not troubled by doctrine that is developed over time. Perhaps, LDS doctrine will someday become orthodox, how would I know. That day is not today.

And that's not even addressing "belief in the teachings of..." I don't know what that means. Lots of people believe in those teaching I suspect.

Don't worry, I know I'm on your ignore list, so this is for anyone else who might be interested.

[_thews]

The definition of the word encompasses the doctrine accepted and the doctrine rejected.

I respectfully disagree.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary states the following for the primary definition of a Christian:

1. One who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ.

When I think of what a Christian is, this is the definition that first comes to mind. I don't immediately start parsing doctrinal tenets of my church, or any other church.

On the basis of the above definition, Mormons are, indeed, Christians.

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary on what a "Mormon" is:

1
: the ancient redactor and compiler of the Book of Mormon presented as divine revelation by Joseph Smith
2
: latter-day saint; especially : a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

When you use "the teachings of Jesus Christ" as the core of your argument, what "teachings" is this based upon? The "restored" teachings of Jesus Christ per the Mormon (LDS) faith as defined by Joseph Smith and his translations, or the teachings of Jesus Christ based on the New testament? If they were the same I could see your point, but they are not the same... not even close, as all of the doctrine is different.

[_thews]

So...the bottom line seems to be that you disagree with the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition on what a Christian is.

Liz, please define one piece of the Mormon doctrine of Joseph Smith that is accepted as "Christian". The answer is there isn't anything Christian about Mormon doctrine. The one common doctrine is belief in the Bible, but the Mormon prophet of God changed the Bible, making all of Mormon doctrine exclusive to Mormonism.

This attempted wordplay is easily compared to the differences between Judaism and Christianity. Jews reject the New Testament. Christians reject the Mormon doctrine translated by Joseph Smith. I would guess you'd counter with "some Christians" reject Mormon doctrine, and I would counter that makes as much sense as stating "some Jews" reject the New Testament. This question attempts to define what Christianity encompasses and fails to define what a "Mormon" is by definition. I can agree that Mormonism has roots in Christian doctrine, but Mormon doctrine is not, in any way shape or form, "Christian"... it's "Mormon" by definition.

For arguments sake, let me present an absurd analogy. The Lucky Charms leprechaun speaks to me telling me that he has a restored doctrine of Jesus Christ. I translate the magical plates he gives me using magical seer stones and change the Bible. Would a church based on this premise be defined as "Christian" because I started with the Bible and claimed Jesus Christ was giving me this new doctrine? Isn't the concept of a "restored" version of what Jesus Christ supposedly taught warrant a different definition? In this analogy, I place as much faith in a cartoon leprechaun as I do in Joseph Smith as a prophet of God. Do you see the point?

[_beastie]

ck

Beastie, I would only point out here that Jersey Girl apparently hopes to tickle your ear, for whatever reason. Personally, I have no such expectation and hope to do the exact opposite. Thereby, I hope we're being more rigorously honest with each other than her blithe commendation suggests.

No, I don’t think Jersey Girl was tickling my ear, and certainly Hoops, with whom I’ve had contention on this thread, wasn’t tickling my ear. I think they were simply applying the basic foundation of Evangelical belief.

Now, I understand that not all EVs adhere to this belief. There are variances of beliefs within mainstream Christianity as a whole and even within the subset movements. But many EVs believe “once saved, always saved.” When Hoops stated that being a Christian means being forgiven of one’s past, present, and FUTURE sins, I suspected Hoops, like many other EVs, accepts “once saved, always saved.”

I’m not familiar enough with your specific beliefs to understand where you’re coming from in regards to whether or not I was saved. But if you accept what I’m saying as truthful, which you should, I would first guess you are saying that it is my actions subsequent to my accepting Jesus as my Savior which render me unsaved. Many EVs believe that no actions subsequent to accepting Jesus as one’s Savior can render the person unsaved.

I’ve talked to believers about this numerous times in the past. I think that part of the reasoning, from these past discussions, is that since I sincerely accepted Jesus as my Savior in 1995, while I may be confused and wandering right now, eventually I will find my way “home.” LDS teach something similar, but it’s in regards to the faith of the parents. If LDS parents are faithful and teach their children well, even if those children stray from the path, they will one day return “home.”

I think that some of the EVs I’ve talked to in the past blame Mormonism for my current problems with belief and cut me some slack due to that. But to accept that I’m unsaved because of my subsequent actions after accepting Jesus as my Savior means that salvation is conditional on more than just accepting Jesus as one’s Savior. As I said, I understand that not all EVs adhere to “once saved, always saved” and maybe you don’t. So I understand, if you reject that idea, you saying I’m not saved NOW.

But what I don’t understand is why you would say I wasn’t saved in 1995, unless you have some Calvinist tendencies, and believe God has predestined who will be saved, and if God hasn’t chosen you, then trying to get saved on your own won’t work. You say you accept my honesty, so there must be some reason you’re saying that, despite my sincerity and then-beliefs, I still wasn’t saved after accepting Jesus as my Savior. I’m hoping you’ll clarify.

[_MsJack]

But I can't pretend that "we're all Christians" when everything Mormons do says I'm not.

QFT.

I used to be rather dismissive of people who denied that Mormons were Christians. A lot of sincere examining and reading on what Mormons actually say about other Christians and how they treat us was part of what made me reconsider the question.