Jump to content

Are Mormons Christians?


djet
 Share

83 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Now I have a simple question: What do you believe happens when you die?

 

Oh, the infamous "What do you believe when you die" question.

 

Our bodies decompose into the casket (since the metal casket itself doesn't decompose for a significantly longer period of time). If you've decided to get buried in a wooden box, your death and decomposition would foster life for generations to come (which is a wonderful and accurate thought) because you actually have a chance to decompose into the soil.

 

That's it.

 

Of course I've heard the similar tangent of "Well, what if you're wrong? Then you'll go to hell!" Well, what if YOU'RE wrong? You've just spent thousands of hours while living for nothing. You could have had a little fun, help the needy (which many churches do not do anymore), or anything to make your life more meaningful. Yet you decided to follow a religion and based your entire life off of laws like you can't wear cotton/poly blends (Lev 19:19).

 

That is like saying:

 

Yeah, we all know that 1+1=2, unless you're dealing with lower values of 1. In which case 1+1=1. If we're dealing with higher values of 1 1+1=3!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So your point Nonny is that anyone who does not believe in what you say is ignorant? You are accusing martin of being simple-minded while you are taking the same opinion towards Mark 5. Yes Jesus could have very easily said, "Zap!" and knocked the demon out of the man, but he chose a method demonstrating the vileness of the demon and through his removal of it, his power to save. Now you have simply picked out a verse of the Bible, taken it down word for word without actually critically thinking, ironically what you expect us as Christians to do. For example, interpret the Song of Solomon Chapter 4 literally:

 

 

 

If you do, it's not that pretty:

 

ss.gif

 

 

What we mean when we say "It's not about logic, it's about faith," is that we didn't sit down one day, make a pros and cons of Christianity and then BAM! decided that we're going to be Christian. Now I grew up in the Bible Belt of the South and went to church on sundays, and on and on. But personally, I believed it was a whole lot of bunk that older people did cause they were too stupid to have any real fun. It wasn't until I was in my mid-teens and my mother started a profound problem with alcoholism that I started to "wake up and smell the roses" as you might say. I was considering two options at the time. I was either going to kill myself or kill her. (Sounds kinda crazy in retrospect). At that time I truly realized how much of a mess I had become and it certainly wasn't the knowledge that I might be all alone in the universe that turned me around. Now I don't tell you this to try to make you feel sorry for me or to flaunt my own abilities of self-reparation. I tell you it to remind you that it's not a bunch of brain-washed idiots, as most anti-Christians members of this forum believe, it's people who have realized [insert random overused Christian cliché about having something more to life. It's hard to explain it in a forum post.]

 

Now I have a simple question: What do you believe happens when you die?

 

Thank you!! It's true that there are none so blind as those who cannot see. We can only hope and pray that the Lord will shine His light on them. I have tried to sow the seed. Sadly some will always fall on infertile ground. On to pastures new. May God bless you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's true that there are none so blind as those who cannot see.

It is also true that researchers and molecular biologist have discovered that some people have a defective gene which makes them vulnerable and attracted to religion, the same as an alcoholic would be vulnerable toward alcohol, or a drug addict would be vulnerable toward certain drugs. Science shows us that it has nothing to do with "infertile ground" and more to do with genes :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maxintosh: Interesting. Can you please provide a link or reference to support that claim?

Well first it's not a 'claim' ;) There are plenty of books on the topic if you're into the kind of reading that molecular biologist enjoy. Here is one book, here is another, and there are many more on the topic. There was also a 'cliff notes' version of it located in the October 25, 2004 copy of Time and several other magazines. There is more than enough evidence to support the fact that it is no coincidence that alcoholics, drug addicts and religious fanatics all act the same predictable way when you remove (or try to remove) their addiction from their lives. BTW, Buddhist have believed all of this for eons. The question isn't about the defective gene, the question is why is it there. Is it just a freak of nature developed over time as most genetic defects occur, or did God deliberately put it there as a sort of "phone home" mechanism? Either way one thing is for sure, religion is not needed and has nothing to do with any of it, as all religion is man made and has nothing to do with God per se. It's like they say, God doesn't need religions, religions need God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well first it's not a 'claim' ;) There are plenty of books on the topic if you're into the kind of reading that molecular biologist enjoy. Here is one book, here is another, and there are many more on the topic. There was also a 'cliff notes' version of it located in the October 25, 2004 copy of Time and several other magazines. There is more than enough evidence to support the fact that it is no coincidence that alcoholics, drug addicts and religious fanatics all act the same predictable way when you remove (or try to remove) their addiction from their lives. BTW, Buddhist have believed all of this for eons. The question isn't about the defective gene, the question is why is it there. Is it just a freak of nature developed over time as most genetic defects occur, or did God deliberately put it there as a sort of "phone home" mechanism? Either way one thing is for sure, religion is not needed and has nothing to do with any of it, as all religion is man made and has nothing to do with God per se. It's like they say, God doesn't need religions, religions need God.

 

Pretty interesting read and so true! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One could equally say that all atheists or non believing fanatics act in the same predictable way. I do not see how my believing in God and Jesus makes me a fanatic. I just have faith in God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. I name the three because I believe that you cannot have one without the others.

 

Jesus siad many times - "I tell the truth.." - I am merely doing the same. You do not have to believe any of it - that is your choice. The difference is that I am able to understand and respect others views - something you are clearly unable to do - thus you are clearly a fanatic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest question here is, what is the definition of "Christian." I have always believed it to be anyone who follows Christ, essentially a disciple, and Worships God the Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and believes in the Holy Spirit. That seems to be the only real logical definition of being "CHRISTian." One who believes in and follows Jesus Christ, recognizes Christ as their Savior.

By this, Mormons, or latter-day saints, are Christian. Otherwise we can all just say most religions are basically Catholic because they just broke off the Catholic church and reformed according to what their original leader thought. And Mormons don't by any means set Joseph Smith higher than Christ, nor do they worship him, but rather recognize him as the man chosen to "restore" what is believed to have been lost; priesthood authority. Just because they have different beliefs (who doesn't) than another church most consider Christian, then what makes one church christian and another not if they both believe in Christ as their savior and follow Him?

I think a lot of you are making up the definition of "Christian" so that mormons do not fit it. Well why can't mormons then make up their own definition of Christian so that, say, catholics don't fit the described terms of the definition? Does anyone have a strict, agreed upon, solid and universally accepted, or published definition of "Christian?" I would bet it all depends on who you talk to, which means there is no universally accepted definition which makes this whole argument pretty silly actually.

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1)

Maxintosh: You are "preaching to the choir". :( I was just interested in where that specific 'gene thing' was documented.

 

One hypothesis is that, from an evolutionary point-of-view, the advantage of that gene would be that young kids do not need to be convinced, only told. In a world where you are constantly on the move, i.e. say 20000 BC, as in a hunter-gatherer time, you would not have time for, or the capacity (as a society) of, understanding "why" and therefore be unable to "educate" in any other way than telling. It's kind of like a kid going "why?" at everything and only getting the response "because". I can not detail the hypothesis, nor is it mine.

 

2)

I think the biggest question here is, what is the definition of "Christian." I have always believed it to be anyone who follows Christ, essentially a disciple, and Worships God the Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and believes in the Holy Spirit. That seems to be the only real logical definition of being "CHRISTian." One who believes in and follows Jesus Christ, recognizes Christ as their Savior.

By this, Mormons, or latter-day saints, are Christian.

One could argue like that, but the question whether the two (or more) groups agree on the word Christ having the same meaning. I.e. one group can still go: "OK, you believe in what you call Christ, but that is not what is meant with (they usually leave out the word "our" here) Christ. Hence, you do not believe in Christ!"

 

Otherwise we can all just say most religions are basically Catholic because they just broke off the Catholic church and reformed according to what their original leader thought.

 

Uhmmm... forgive me for being uneducated on the subject but I thought "Christian" was a lower common denominator than "Catholic"????

 

And Mormons don't by any means set Joseph Smith higher than Christ, nor do they worship him, but rather recognize him as the man chosen to "restore" what is believed to have been lost; priesthood authority. Just because they have different beliefs (who doesn't) than another church most consider Christian, then what makes one church christian and another not if they both believe in Christ as their savior and follow Him?

Again see first comment on your quote.

 

I think a lot of you are making up the definition of "Christian" so that mormons do not fit it. Well why can't mormons then make up their own definition of Christian so that, say, catholics don't fit the described terms of the definition?

I agree, most seem to do. Yes they could if they wanted to.

 

Does anyone have a strict, agreed upon, solid and universally accepted, or published definition of "Christian?" I would bet it all depends on who you talk to, which means there is no universally accepted definition which makes this whole argument pretty silly actually.

Thoughts?

I don't think you could find one. If you did, it would not take many seconds before someone pointed out that you are very wrong. I do think that this argument is very silly, yes. And mostly for the reasons you said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is like saying:
Logical person - "1+1=2"

 

Illogical person - "no it's not, it's 5"

Logical person - "Everyone educated in the matter knows it is 2"

 

Illogical person - "So your point is that anyone who does not believe in what you say is ignorant?"

To be clear, this isn't really logic. A logical person would not need to resort to the Appeal to Authority in your example.

 

After all, by this logic, the Book of Mormon is true because everyone educated in the matter* knows that the Book of Mormon is true.

 

*This illustrates another problem with the Appeal to Authority: whose authority? It only works if we agree on the authority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One could equally say that all atheists or non believing fanatics act in the same predictable way.

Not true. Arriving at a conclusion from inference and logic is totally different from arriving at a conclusion because you are trained or told to. A monkey can be trained to ride a bike. That doesn't mean that the monkey logically understands anything about bikes.

 

you cannot have one without the others.

That may be your belief but it is also an example of part of the hypocrisy of religions. The first commandment clearly states that "Thou shall have no other gods before me". So what do they do? They make up an excuse on why it's OK to have strange gods before God :D

 

Jesus siad many times

Pure here say. Not based on fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arriving at a conclusion from inference and logic is totally different from arriving at a conclusion because you are trained or told to.

Am I missing something? Take this in conjunction with the last statement of yours that I responded to. How can you hold these 2 statements as examples of logic? Please clarify or point out what I'm missing.

Pure here say.

Hearsay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus said that we (born again Christians) would be persecuted and vilified as He was - well I am proud to be His follower. I am thankful to God that He made me in His own image and that one day I will see him. I believe too in God as the creator of all things, that I did not evolve from pond life, my ancestors were not apes. I thank Him that He gave me free will so that I could choose whether to follow Him or not. I am grateful that my name is written in His book of life.

 

That said I leave this topic and can only pray that one day the scales will be removed from your eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Mormonism is very different from Christianity. Also, a few facts.

-Jehova Witnesses are not Christians.

-Westboro Baptist Church members and supporters are certainly NOT followers of God.

-I don't think todays Mormons practice polygamy. I'm not sure.

And trust me. Just because my icon and signature make me out to be a religious guy, doesn't mean I'm stuck-up and close-minded. Christians can be Liberal, too, can't they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For one I explicitly said in the topic NOT to post about the validity of either religion.

 

 

 

but it's a tough call taking in consider that it just doesn't matter,  there is not even a definite way to define what a follower of a christian religion is because it'S religion, there is nothing you can grab by the back of the neck and proof it.

 

 

you are both following a made up story with the same origins, the desert, where heat and lack of water does such things with peoples minds.

 

 

 

and on the other hand, for hundreds of years non believers where told to shut up, we don't want anymore :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and on the other hand, for hundreds of years non believers where told to shut up, we don't want anymore :)

 

I don't tell a non-believer to shut up. Unless they feel they must act like an {censored} to me and start making false-claims just to provoke me. Then I just call them pathetic for being a jackass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Unless they feel they must act like an {censored} to me and start making false-claims just to provoke me.

 

the {censored} acting part should not be. but false claims and the provoking, well, i don't know what to say but i always had the opinion that it's the other way round, never had an non beliver in front of my door telling my stuff i don't want to hear about nor claiming it in radio and television continusly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

me

but there are also some times when i get my stuff told despite i don't want to hear, right now would be an example

OK

Because it sounded like you never hear (for example) atheists talking about atheism on TV or the Radio.

 

Thanks for clarifying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no, that was what i ment, i thought you were reffering to the typo (me/my) 

 

actualy there are no atheist on tv or the radio talking about atheism (but the persons speaking are most likely atheists), because what would you like to talk about? atheism is a lack of belive, so there is nothing to talk about. i read an articel telling that about 75% of the people under 30 in germany don't belive in an personel god, doesn't look much different in the rest of western europe, it's no big deal and nothing in media like an atheist speaking about atheism.

 

but every morning when i get in my car and i turn on my radio i get a bible quote for my day, when i stay i walk by an advertisment chances are big that i could be something telling me i should belive and if someone unexpectet ringing my doorbell it's most likly mormons or jehovas whintness peopel. not to forget about the annoyng bell on sunday mornings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...because what would you like to talk about? atheism is a lack of belive, so there is nothing to talk about....

This is the point that makes your post make sense. For there are some people for whom atheism is a belief: a belief that there is no God. This is an important distinction. I've seen shows, YouTube videos, protesters, interviews, The Golden Compass movie and books. All preaching the gospel of atheism (or post-theism, as some call what they preach).

 

I'll grant you that atheist messages are nowhere near as popular as religious messages.

 

 

not to forget about the annoyng bell on sunday mornings.

That reminds me of a Monty Python sketch:

(Sound: Church bells, lots of them, ringing.)

 

Man: I wish those bloody bells would stop.

 

Wife: Oh, it's quite nice dear, it's Sunday, it's the church.

 

M: What about us atheists? Why should we 'ave to listen to that sectarian turmoil?

 

W: You're a lapsed atheist, dear.

 

M: The principle's the same. The Mohmedans don't come 'round here wavin' bells at us! We don't get Buddhists playing bagpipes in our bathroom! Or Hindus harmonizing in the hall! The Shintus don't come here shattering sheet glass in the {censored}house, shouting slogans-

 

W: All right, don't practice your alliteration on me.

 

M: Anyway, when I membership card and blazer badge back from the League of Agnostics, I shall urge the executive to lodge a protest against that religious racket! Pass the butter knife!

 

W: WHAT??

 

M: PASS THE BUTTER KNIFE!! (pause) THANK YOU! IF ONLY WE HAD SOME KIND OF MISSILE!

 

W: 'OLD ON, I'LL CLOSE THE WINDOW.

 

M: WHAT?!

 

W: I SAID, I'LL CLOSE THE WINDOW!

 

(Sound: Window closing, bells get faint, but are still there)

 

M: If only we had some kind of missile, we could take the steam out of those bells.

 

W: Well, you could always use the number 14-St. Joseph-the-somewhat- divine-on-the-hill ballistic missile. It's in the attic.

 

M: What ballistic missile would this be, then?

 

(Sound: Bells begin to get increasingly louder)

 

W: I made it for you, it's your birthday present!

 

M: Just what I wanted, 'ow nice of you to remember, my pet. 'ERE!

 

W: WHAT?

 

M: THOSE BELLS ARE GETTING LOUDER!

 

W: WHAT?

 

M: THOSE BELLS ARE GETTING LOUDER!!

 

W: THE BELLS ARE GETTING LOUDER! OOOH, LOOK!

 

M: WHAT?

 

W: THE CHURCH, IT.. ITS COMING CLOSER! ITS COMING DOWN THE 'ILL!

 

M: WHAT A LIBERTY!

 

W: ITS TURNING INTO OUR LANE! WELL, YOU BETTER GO PUT IT OUT OF IT'S MISERY.

 

M: WHERE'S THIS MISSILE, THEN?

 

W: IT'S IN THE ATTIC. PRESS THE BUTTON MARKED CHURCH!

 

M: 'OW DO I AIM IT?

 

W: IT AUTOMATICALLY HOMES IN ON THE NEAREST PLACE OF WORSHIP!

 

M: BUT THAT'S ST. MARKS!

 

W: IT ISN'T NOW, LOOK!! OH, ITS OP'NING THE GATE.

 

M: WHAT? USE THE MEGAPHONE!

 

W: IT'S OP'NING THE GATE!! 'HURRY UP, ITS TRAMPLING OVER THE AZALIAS!

 

(Sound: Missle launch, explosion, bells diminish)

 

M: Did I 'it it?

 

W: Yes, right up the aisle.

 

M: Well I've always said, There's nothing an agnostic can't do if he really doesn't know whether he believes in anything or not.

Retrieved from http://mzonline.com/bin/view/Python/ChurchBellsSketch

 

If anyone has this in audio, post it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they both started from the same myth and eventually evolved into something different.

 

 

Maxintosh they did not start the same they are more the same now then ever and what believing that the human race is brilliant enough to create themselves isnt a myth.... i mean come on thats all anti semi and athiest are trying to get at have thier cake and eat it to .... there is no standards casue im my own god.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maxintosh they did not start the same they are more the same now then ever and what believing that the human race is brilliant enough to create themselves isnt a myth....

All religions have their roots in myth. It illuminates how foolish and unnecessary all religions are in modern day for educated people. All superstitions implanted in religion also have their roots in myth. For example; praying before a meal. Do yourself one of your life's biggest favors and please get off the Internet and pick up a book (yes a real book) about the subject and educate yourself. A good place to start is a book (or DVD) called The Power of Myth. What, did you just think that a caveman woke up one day and suddenly magically, started to believe in your religion? :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All superstitions implanted in religion also have their roots in myth. For example; praying before a meal.
That isn't reeeally a superstition, its more thanking God for the food... Would you call giving thanks a superstition?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...