That ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.

Reactions
504 140 7
#71
The LDS church (Mormon) does not subscribe to the trinity as understood by most Christian religions, which is that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one being. This was first discussed in christian councils as early as 325 AD at the time of the Nicene Creed. Such a council would decide how to resolve a disagreement, and would create a creed, and the various groups would adopt it (or not).

The Athanasian Creed, 6th century, more explicitly lays down the equivalence of the trinity, but isn't as widely adopted as the Nicene creed (which still strongly suggests it, but doesn't state it as strongly) - but it's still fairly widely adopted.

Since under the trinity belief system there is still only one omnipotent/omniscient being, it still counts as monotheism.

The LDS doctrine holds that the three are separate beings, and is in fact the first of the 13 Articles of Faith which provide a fairly concise overview of our doctrinal foundation:

"1 We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost."

About a quarter of the way through this article (under "How are we different", under the first set of bullet points) there's a decent discussion about what we believe happened that caused these councils to form, creeds created, and why we do not subscribe to them:

https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/what-mormons-believe-about-jesus-christ

In short, we believe that an apostasy occurred, and that while good and great leaders attempted to lead christianity in the correct direction, prophecy and prophets, and in particular the priesthood, wasn't present on the earth not too long after the apostles had died. This led to a great deal of confusion about correct doctrine, which lead to a lot of councils and creeds, which lead to a lot of factions believing different things about God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost.

As far as monotheism, we only worship God the Father, and do so in the name of Jesus Christ. We are Christ's disciples, but He directs us to worship the Father, and thus I would still suggest this is a monotheistic religion.

But I'm sure that would depend greatly on one's definition of monotheism. If it's strictly that there is absolutely only one God, period, and that no other being could ever approach God's level of power/knowledge/etc, then there's probably more to discuss. If it's merely whether the religion only worships one God, then it's an easy "Yes, the LDS church is monotheistic."
 
Reactions
754 348 15
#73
In short, we believe that an apostasy occurred, and that while good and great leaders attempted to lead christianity in the correct direction, prophecy and prophets, and in particular the priesthood, wasn't present on the earth not too long after the apostles had died. This led to a great deal of confusion about correct doctrine, which lead to a lot of councils and creeds, which lead to a lot of factions believing different things about God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost.
And that is basically why Christians do not believe LDS is a Christian sect or denomination.

God the Father ("Elohim" to the LDS) is NOT separate from Jesus, nor the Holy Spirit.
 

figmentPez

Staff member
Reactions
3,139 576 6
#76
Because all three are different aspects of the same person.
That's not trinitarianism. Churches that teach the trinity teach 3 persons, one God, and the definition of "person" is very specific to theology. It's not "human", or "body", or a number of other things.
 
Reactions
504 140 7
#77
And, likewise, the LDS in turn believes the same about the "mainstream Christian" denominations.
We believe other Christian religions and followers are Christians. Many disagree that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints follows Christ or has any claim to His name, ie to be called Christian, but we do not make the same claim. We do have differences in doctrine, we have a different conception of heaven and how eternity works, so we do have a claim regarding a more complete truth, similar to others who claim to have the one truth to obtain heaven, but we do not deny others the use of the name Christian.

I don’t think it’s worth arguing, though, for some it’s simply a matter of semantics, for others anyone who doesn’t believe the exact same belief and follow the same creeds they do has no claim to His name. For many they simply seek to save souls and they believe that convincing someone they aren’t Christian yet gives them a foot in the door, so to speak. It’s not that they are denying salvation, it’s that they want people to recognize that their current path doesn’t lead to salvation.

You can’t force someone into heaven, and I’m not convinced scaring people into religion with thoughts of death and hell is useful. It may be helpful for some but for me Christ is a light, an opportunity for not just eternal life and happiness, but happiness and joy here during life.

As far as the LDS are concerned, nearly all Christians of any denomination will get to Heaven. While we do believe there are degrees of glory within heaven, and not all will obtain the higher degrees, very few people who have ever been born or will ever be born will be consigned to what might be considered hell.
 
Reactions
754 348 15
#79
To paraphrase the great Max McGee: "Aw, man, don't bring up that Trump idiot here..."
 
Reactions
504 140 7
#81
You can be a disciple or follower of Christ, and thus a Christian, without having authority to lead His church, power to perform ordinances in His place, or the gift of prophecy.
 
Reactions
1,415 274 6
#82
As far as the LDS are concerned, nearly all Christians of any denomination will get to Heaven. While we do believe there are degrees of glory within heaven, and not all will obtain the higher degrees, very few people who have ever been born or will ever be born will be consigned to what might be considered hell.
Man, even heaven has gated communities? Guess it's back to sinning.
 
Reactions
698 101 11
#85
You can be a disciple or follower of Christ, and thus a Christian, without having authority to lead His church, power to perform ordinances in His place, or the gift of prophecy.
AKA, sitting in the cheap seats of Christianity.
 
Reactions
754 348 15
#87
Funny you should say all that, @stienman. We're going over the Sermon on the Mount in our church right now, and there's a little piece Jesus discusses near the end:

"Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ "
 
Reactions
299 37 13
#88
Funny you should say all that, @stienman. We're going over the Sermon on the Mount in our church right now, and there's a little piece Jesus discusses near the end:

"Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ "
You want to REALLY muddy the issue, read the section of The Last Battle that deals with the worshipper of another (false? Devil?) god in the "afterlife" there. The message is more-or-less that whatever good you do, you do in the name of God no matter what you think, and all evil you do is in the name of the devil. I'm not saying that's correct (I don't think it is), but it's another perspective on it.

It's applicable because Narnia is as explicitly Christian as you can get without outright saying it.
 
Reactions
2,757 795 25
#89
It's applicable because Narnia is as explicitly Christian as you can get without outright saying it.
Preeetty sure that was the point, and also what inspired The Golden Compass (in retaliation).

—Patrick
 
Reactions
504 140 7
#90
A complete response would require a much longer post, but I’ve only got a few minutes, so, in short:

The “kingdom” part seems relevant to me. Why not just say heaven? If you want to inherit all that God offers, and have place in His kingdom in heaven, then you will have to faithfully follow Him and His Son.

However, this verse doesn’t discount place in heaven - away from the kingdom of heaven - for others. Perhaps the kingdom of heaven is a higher degree of heaven, one much closer spiritually to God.

It is my opinion that if you didn’t desire to live according to His commandments in life, you wouldn’t desire to live them, or with Him, after death anyway.

But again, a lot depends on definition of heaven and hell. If heaven is being with God and hell anywhere else, regardless of one’s happiness, then you could more easily compare the LDS afterlife doctrine with other Christian religious afterlife doctrines.
 

fade

Staff member
Reactions
365 91 4
#91
The whole concept of Sola Gratia, or the idea of levels of reward seem very strange to me, I must admit. The idea that you can be a good person and be denied eternal happiness simply because you could not accept something without proof seems rather cruel to me. It seems strange to me to be rewarded more because you picked the more correct version of things to believe without proof. It seems even stranger when someone tells me that God made me as I am and that He's omniscient. Strange in that He already knows how it's going to work out for me, and if I am made by Him, then didn't my requirement for proof come from Him as well? Therefore, was I created to fail? I know these are old questions that have been tackled for centuries. But they're also old because they have had no satisfactory answer.
 
Reactions
199 21 0
#92
I got so much to say about so many of these things! I don't know if I have enough time.

But this one is worth my best effort right now.

The whole concept of Sola Gratia, or the idea of levels of reward seem very strange to me, I must admit. The idea that you can be a good person and be denied eternal happiness simply because you could not accept something without proof seems rather cruel to me. It seems strange to me to be rewarded more because you picked the more correct version of things to believe without proof. It seems even stranger when someone tells me that God made me as I am and that He's omniscient. Strange in that He already knows how it's going to work out for me, and if I am made by Him, then didn't my requirement for proof come from Him as well? Therefore, was I created to fail? I know these are old questions that have been tackled for centuries. But they're also old because they have had no satisfactory answer.
I think this comes down to whether or not you believe omniscience precludes free will (such as Calvinist pre-determination) or not. I believe that omniscience does not preclude free will.

God may be a piece of why you need proof - were you born with scepticism as part of a vision? But many hard sceptics (I'd consider myself one) believe in God, so obviously there's some other type of proof out there. I mean, you seem to be a moral person - but from whence does morality derive without God? At a certain point, an atheistic view has to concede to some level of humanistic pragmatism - i.e. 'do what you want unless it hurts someone' but it cannot deny that there's no good answer to the question "What if I enjoy hurting someone?"

Ivan and Alyosha, hashing it out forever.
 
Reactions
698 101 11
#93
And that is basically why Christians do not believe LDS is a Christian sect or denomination.

God the Father ("Elohim" to the LDS) is NOT separate from Jesus, nor the Holy Spirit.
Nah dude, that' just makes them heretics... bunch of Arians, the lot of them.

You know, i wonder, do any of the breakaway sects from the 1st Council of Nicaea still exist?
Post automatically merged:

The whole concept of Sola Gratia, or the idea of levels of reward seem very strange to me, I must admit. The idea that you can be a good person and be denied eternal happiness simply because you could not accept something without proof seems rather cruel to me.

Based on the history of Protestantism, it was likely a way to make it clear one can't buy their way into Heaven in any way, and salvation is a gift, not a payment.
 
Last edited:

figmentPez

Staff member
Reactions
3,139 576 6
#94
You know, i wonder, do any of the breakaway sects from the 1st Council of Nicaea still exist?
I don't know if there's an unbroken line of history, but Modalism* definitely still exists. It's currently known as "Jesus Only" and is usually tied right in to the Prosperity Gospel. I think the largest Modalist group is the United Pentecostal Church International. They're kooky for a lot of reasons. Believing you have to speak in tongues to be saved. That you have to have to be baptized in the exact words "in the name of Jesus", and that baptisms "in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit" can't save. And at least some congregations forbid women from wearing make-up, and require them to wear dresses.

*The belief that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are God just acting in different ways at different times.
 
Last edited:
Reactions
698 101 11
#95
Yeah, i was wondering about an unbroken line, since, you know, the Mormons are clearly Arians too.

I know there are some churches that split off after the 3rd or 4th Council still around in the Middle East and N. Africa...
 

figmentPez

Staff member
Reactions
3,139 576 6
#97
Not sure if misspelling “Asian” or “Aryan” or trying to make some kind of point.
Arianism - in short it's a doctrine that holds that the Son was begotten at some point in time, and has not existed from eternity. This was rejected at the Council of Nicea, and the mainstream Christian belief that the Son has always existed was upheld.
 
Reactions
1,371 611 31
Rejoice! For the Lord hath spoken. Through the divine word of the Lord and because membership is dropping, the Church of Jesus Christ and Latter Day Saints has decided that gay people are no longer apostates. It's quite the flip flop for the Lord to change his mind in a 4 year period, but it sure is handy for LDS leadership.
 
Last edited:
Reactions
479 88 1
Rejoice! For the Lord hath spoken. Through the divine word of the Lord and because membership is dropping, the Church of Jesus Christ and Latter Day Saints has decided that gay people are no longer apostates. It's quite the flip flop for the Lord to change his mind in a 4 year period, but it sure is handy for LDS leadership.
They're doing better than Brunei.
 

Dave

Staff member
Reactions
2,569 1,194 23
Just a quick note. I realize that @stienman has not been around, but this is still his thread and it will NOT be used to bash religion in his absence. Moved the Alabama abortion posts to the appropriate political thread.
 
Top