When will Christians acknowledge Mormons are Christian too?

[_bcuzbcuz]

All those Mormons that feel bad about other Christians not recognizing Mormons as Christians should fight for all believers of Joseph Smith to be included as Mormons. Anything else would make them hypocrites.

I personally have no problems with a wide range of beliefs. I think that over time God will direct us all to truth. And since we are all wrong about many things we should be more tolerant of others on their personal path.

We finally agree on something. I remember a joke in my distant youth. A man gets to the pearly gates, meets St. Peter and St. Peter takes him on a tour of heaven. The man ohhhs and ahhhs at all the sights, but St. Peter hushes him when they come up to high wall. "Why must I be quiet?" whispers the man. St. Peter responds. "This is where the Mormons are. They think they're the only ones here."

[_bcuzbcuz]

the OP is quite ridiculous and just another feeble Mormon bashing attempt.

can't understand why Mormons would not crave the approval of "Christians" like Falwell, ...................., or even the esteemed Aimee Semple Mcpherson.

The OP is sophomoric at best

Because Aimee Semple McPherson is dead????? It's a little late to go asking for her approval.

[_subgenius]

i would argue that most Christians accept Mormons as Christians...some evangelical organizations, such as the Baptists, do not. However, one can be Christian without being Baptist....and to be fair many Baptists consider many people not Christian.
So, the OP is quite ridiculous and just another feeble Mormon bashing attempt.

can't understand why Mormons would not crave the approval of "Christians" like Falwell, Swaggart, Tilton, Langworthy, Reeves, Barron, Privette, Popoff, Haggard, or even the esteemed Aimee Semple Mcpherson.

An easy argument can be made about when, if ever, will Mormons consider anyone else as being Christian. (see also http://Mormon.org/articles-of-faith)

The OP is sophomoric at best

3.We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel. The fact is that NO ONE but Christ did, can, will keep the Law of God. All have sinned and come short of the glory of God. One can apply the law and use the law as a guide. But placing one's faith in being able to keep the law or ordinances is an impossible task doomed to failure. Christ fills the gap through faith in Him and Him alone.

And thus you see why that article of faith behind with "through the atonement...". You see rather than not try at all, which is contrary to commandments and scriptures, we recognize that one must try and also recognize the atonement...whereas you claim that one merely only has to recognize.
Clearly this article is in line with the teaching of the gospel whereas one must both have faith in Christ and be active with that faith...your armchair gospel simply will not do and contradicts the teachings of the lord quite blatantly.

[_Albion]

You make the false charge that Christian salvation is an "armchair faith" and by extension proclaim the idea that Christians believe that once they are saved they can do what they like. This is a false characterization of the Christian position. Keeping the commandments, works, service and such are incumbent upon the Christian but they are the expression, the public demonstration, of the saving grace which has redeemed the repentant sinner and not the means to earn it. We demonstrate out faith which cannot be seen by a holy life lived that can be seen.

[_subgenius]

You make the false charge that Christian salvation is an "armchair faith" and by extension proclaim the idea that Christians believe that once they are saved they can do what they like. This is a false characterization of the Christian position. Keeping the commandments, works, service and such are incumbent upon the Christian but they are the expression, the public demonstration, of the saving grace which has redeemed the repentant sinner and not the means to earn it. We demonstrate out faith which cannot be seen by a holy life lived that can be seen.

conversely the claim above that Mormons put their faith in works is blatantly false.
Nevertheless, you make an interesting statement here:
"....they are the expression, the public demonstration....can be seen." - seen by who? is a witness necessary?
This is odd, for it is well known that God knows the heart...and the act of an expression/public demonstration could be just as sincere as an insincere act.
Yet clearly God commands us to "act"....God commands us to act because without that action we are "dead". So, a change of heart is simply not enough...God insists that our changed hearts also perform (ie notice you use of the word "incumbent").
So, it is not a point that one aspect earns "it" over the other or that one aspect can earn it without the other aspect...but simply that both, equally together, are the only means to earn it. Being baptized is the most simple expression of this concept.
We are commanded to both repent and be baptized, where one is not being preferred, or more necessary, over the other....they are inseparable.

[_Albion]

You make the false charge that Christian salvation is an "armchair faith" and by extension proclaim the idea that Christians believe that once they are saved they can do what they like. This is a false characterization of the Christian position. Keeping the commandments, works, service and such are incumbent upon the Christian but they are the expression, the public demonstration, of the saving grace which has redeemed the repentant sinner and not the means to earn it. We demonstrate out faith which cannot be seen by a holy life lived that can be seen.

conversely the claim above that Mormons put their faith in works is blatantly false.
Nevertheless, you make an interesting statement here:
"....they are the expression, the public demonstration....can be seen." - seen by who? is a witness necessary?
This is odd, for it is well known that God knows the heart...and the act of an expression/public demonstration could be just as sincere as an insincere act.
Yet clearly God commands us to "act"....God commands us to act because without that action we are "dead". So, a change of heart is simply not enough...God insists that our changed hearts also perform (ie notice you use of the word "incumbent").
So, it is not a point that one aspect earns "it" over the other or that one aspect can earn it without the other aspect...but simply that both, equally together, are the only means to earn it. Being baptized is the most simple expression of this concept.
We are commanded to both repent and be baptized, where one is not being preferred, or more necessary, over the other....they are inseparable.

Demonstrated public works so that God might be glorified...a simple extension of John 14:13 "And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father."

I do, of course realize the Mormons don't do good works for "salvation". Mormons and Christians have a different meaning for the term "salvation". As I understand it, the essential salvation that the atonement brings for Mormons stops at resurrection, the rest they have to earn and it is the stuff they do that determines which level they are resurrected to. The works that Mormons are engaged in are for exaltation, presumably to the Godhood to which they aspire. This alone is a theology that separates Mormons from communion with the Christian world.

Certainly, faith without works is dead....but again, they are the expression of a living faith rooted in the assurance of salvation and not the means to earn it. To charge that Christians are locked in an "armchair" faith flies in the face of the mammoth amount of work and service being done by Christians around the world. In the US alone, of the three largest aid organizations two (The Salvation Army and the Southern Baptist Convention) are Christian organizations.

[_Bazooka]

President Gordon B. Hinckley, responding to a question regarding whether Latter-day Saints believe in the “traditional Christ,” stated:

No I don't. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the dispensation of the fullness of times.

[_Bazooka]

To Mormons who believe themselves to be Christians:
Is Warren Jeffs a Mormon?
If not, why not?

[_subgenius]

To Mormons who believe themselves to be Christians:
Is Warren Jeffs a Mormon?
If not, why not?

No, he is not simply just a "Mormon"..
Because, i am pretty sure he was not from CA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon,_California

Seriously, he is not because the distinction is already, and reasonably,being made between a Mormon and Mormon fundamentalist...with Jeffs being the latter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_fundamentalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_se ... amentalist

a good comparison of this distcintion is how the Pentecostal church has sects which handle snakes...one can not exclude them from being called Pentecostal but it is more accurate to speak of them as being snake-handlers, or faith healers...etc...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_handling

that being said, the term Christian would not exclude any of the above mentioned in terms of their beliefs...however, as our temporal laws strive to not regulate one's beliefs they most certainly strive to regulate the practice of those beliefs; especially when that practice can be reasoned as being a crime.

[_subgenius]

President Gordon B. Hinckley, responding to a question regarding whether Latter-day Saints believe in the “traditional Christ,” stated:

No I don't. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the dispensation of the fullness of times.

Christ nonetheless