Jacob Hansen: Yesser No?

[I Have Questions]

However, MG2.0, the essence of Mormonism is not centered on unity among Christian churches; in fact, pure Mormonism, which represents the restored gospel of Christ, asserts that Christianity is a false gospel. In my time, Mormons viewed Christianity as a collection of false religions that had been shaped by paganism over thousands of years.

Now, I see why Mormons strive to present themselves as Christians in a conventional way, yet it contradicts the core teachings of the restored gospel. How can a member of the Mormon church identify as a Christian when the restored gospel teaches that Christianity was and is a corrupted version of the true and restored gospel of Christ, which is Mormonism?

Jacob wants to have it both ways. He wants to say he's a Christian while preaching against Christianity.

It is true that the LDS Church makes the claim to have the authority to administer the ordinances of salvation/exaltation. Beyond that Joseph Smith made it pretty clear that all men are free to worship who or what they may. Sure, if Christianity changed qualitatively from the time of Jesus one might expect it to be referred to as "corrupt". Changed. But entirely lost? Of course not. As I mentioned, again, section 76 comes into play along with proxy work for the dead.

Regards,
MG

In what qualitative way(s) has Christianity changed since the time of Jesus?

[Hound of Heaven]

It is true that the LDS Church makes the claim to have the authority to administer the ordinances of salvation/exaltation. Beyond that Joseph Smith made it pretty clear that all men are free to worship who or what they may. Sure, if Christianity changed qualitatively from the time of Jesus one might expect it to be referred to as "corrupt". Changed. But entirely lost? Of course not. As I mentioned, again, section 76 comes into play along with proxy work for the dead.

Regards,
MG

The Mormon church asserts that it holds the exclusive authority to administer the ordinances of salvation/exaltation. Furthermore, it claims that all religions, including Christianity, are human constructs that do not have any impact on our lives beyond death. As far as Mormonism is concerned, Christianity is a tool of the devil and his angels, this is the reason i will never understand why modern-day Mormons desire to be viewed as Christians.

Last year at the conference, President Nelson stated that other churches cannot impact your life after death. This implies that all other churches are created by humans on this planet, and if you wish to worship the true God in the afterlife, you must select the same gospel that Mormons on earth declare to be the eternal gospel. Do you not consider this concept to be somewhat arrogant, MG2.0?

Is it reasonable to believe and teach that anyone outside the celestial kingdom is in a state of damnation, as the Mormon church suggests? I am unaware of any other church that claims to be Christian while also suggesting that damnation exists in heaven.

[I Have Questions]

It is true that the LDS Church makes the claim to have the authority to administer the ordinances of salvation/exaltation. Beyond that Joseph Smith made it pretty clear that all men are free to worship who or what they may. Sure, if Christianity changed qualitatively from the time of Jesus one might expect it to be referred to as "corrupt". Changed. But entirely lost? Of course not. As I mentioned, again, section 76 comes into play along with proxy work for the dead.

Regards,
MG

The Mormon church asserts that it holds the exclusive authority to administer the ordinances of salvation/exaltation. Furthermore, it claims that all religions, including Christianity, are human constructs that do not have any impact on our lives beyond death. As far as Mormonism is concerned, Christianity is a tool of the devil and his angels, this is the reason i will never understand why modern-day Mormons desire to be viewed as Christians.

Last year at the conference, President Nelson stated that other churches cannot impact your life after death. This implies that all other churches are created by humans on this planet, and if you wish to worship the true God in the afterlife, you must select the same gospel that Mormons on earth declare to be the eternal gospel. Do you not consider this concept to be somewhat arrogant, MG2.0?

Is it reasonable to believe and teach that anyone outside the celestial kingdom is in a state of damnation, as the Mormon church suggests? I am unaware of any other church that claims to be Christian while also suggesting that damnation exists in heaven.

Nelson seeking an audience with the Pope must have been quite humiliating for Nelson. First, having to request an audience in Rome rather than the Pope travelling to SLC to seek out time with the only man on earth who speaks for God, must have pricked the ego a little. And then the Pope barely gives him the time of day in a very brief couple of awkward minutes where Nelson tried to give him a Book of Mormon.

Why didn’t Nelson use his Priesthood power and launch into the first discussion? Surely the Pope could tell who had seniority in the eyes of God?

[sock puppet]

You have been duped. If you listen to these folks you will continue to be duped. Just listen...on your own... to his YouTube channel and make your own determination. If you still think he's cultish then, well, that is YOUR determination. But don't cave into the jaundiced views of those you are interacting with here. That is, if you are truly seeking for truth from all quarters.

I wish you well.

MG's suggestion to "listen...on your own... to his YouTube channel and make your own determination" while simultaneously cautioning against the "jaundiced views of those you are interacting with here" is a truly fascinating approach to seeking truth. It's like being told to explore a forest but to avoid anyone who might have already explored it and could offer guidance.

MG's call to seek "truth from all quarters" is particularly amusing when it seems to come with the caveat that those quarters should not include any critical or differing opinions. It's a unique definition of "all quarters," indeed.

That's some great missionary work, MG.

Everybody Wang Chung--it always brightens my morning to see someone so surgically skewer MG 2.0 in another of his inconsistencies. Thank you, Everybody Wang Chung, my morning is now brighter.

[Moksha]

In what qualitative way(s) has Christianity changed since the time of Jesus?

They've completely dropped the office of Stake President.

[PseudoPaul]

In what qualitative way(s) has Christianity changed since the time of Jesus?

Not directed at me, but for example, Jesus didn't teach atonement theology or his own divinity. In fact Jesus was in no sense of the word a Christian. So I'd say a lot!

Even from the time of Paul or from the time of the synoptic gospels, Christianity has undergone radical changes.

[I Have Questions]

In what qualitative way(s) has Christianity changed since the time of Jesus?

Not directed at me, but for example, Jesus didn't teach atonement theology or his own divinity. In fact Jesus was in no sense of the word a Christian. So I'd say a lot!

Even from the time of Paul or from the time of the synoptic gospels, Christianity has undergone radical changes.

That’s useful. The context though is that Mormonism restores those things that have radically changed. By teaching atonement and Christ’s divinity, both Christianity in general, and Mormonism specifically, are radically different to what Jesus taught. Which in turn undermines the notion of “restoring something”.

[MG 2.0]

It is true that the LDS Church makes the claim to have the authority to administer the ordinances of salvation/exaltation. Beyond that Joseph Smith made it pretty clear that all men are free to worship who or what they may. Sure, if Christianity changed qualitatively from the time of Jesus one might expect it to be referred to as "corrupt". Changed. But entirely lost? Of course not. As I mentioned, again, section 76 comes into play along with proxy work for the dead.

Regards,
MG

In what qualitative way(s) has Christianity changed since the time of Jesus?

The kind of church that existed at the time of Christ and after His death was of a different 'kind' (qualitative disposition) than what has come as a result of the restoration. What is the same, however, is that Jesus is the cornerstone of the church. He has called disciples/apostles and restored His authority to seal in heaven what is sealed on earth. The Father gives approbation to the workings of the church through Jesus Christ. The corruptness during the first few hundred years after Jesus was here morphed into a church that sold indulgences, had doctrinal disputes that ended up in factions, sold positions of authority, and so on. Most importantly the concept of the Godhead/Trinity and God's characteristics became corrupted into something that didn't resemble the teachings of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels and the writings of Paul and the very early church fathers.

Yes, I know, this is where we can get into scriptural exegesis and arguments that might be similar to that which occurred not long after Jesus's crucifixion. But corruption doesn't mean rejection in all aspects. I think God continued to work through Christianity to bring souls to a greater state of being in and through Jesus and the Father. We could go back and forth all day long and into the next day and the day after that arguing about authority, the early teachings/doctrines of Jesus, and God's nature and being. This has been going on for centuries.

Regards,
MG

[Moksha]

Mormons have claimed that things are in a constant state of flux, and that is why we have a Living Prophet to help steady the Ark. If one Prophet tells us to cast out the children of Same Sex parents, that same Prophet can tell us to disregard the previous statement. Yin and Yang to help keep us on the deviating pathway.

Isn't that right, MG?

[I Have Questions]

In what qualitative way(s) has Christianity changed since the time of Jesus?

The kind of church that existed at the time of Christ and after His death was of a different 'kind' (qualitative disposition) than what has come as a result of the restoration.

You are shifting the goalposts. You said that Christianity was qualitatively different to what Jesus taught, hence the need to restore the things that Jesus taught. Now you’re saying that the SLC LDS Church is qualitatively different to what Jesus taught. The amount of flip flops in your arguments is more than in a Havaianas factory. Make your mind up.