The Question: Are Mormons Christian? A Biblical Approach

[_maklelan]

Do you really need analogies such as this? I don't.

If you don't need the analogy then why did you appeal to that misunderstanding of the rhetoric?

Do you then agree that Christ stated that there is only one (1) true, real or genuine God? At least in this passage?

Yes, but I reject your interpretation of the comment and its cosmological significance.

Why don't we finish with John 17:3 before you move on?

I don't think you're going to finish it, but go ahead and address my concern.

Are you saying you can be a Christian and not believe the teachings of Christ?

Depends on the teachings. Do you believe his teaching about gouging out your eye if it's involved in sin. Do you believe his teaching about anyone who doesn't reject their family not being worthy of him?

I haven't in any sense stomped my feet, and you are seemingly trying to distract by bringing up other concerns when we haven't finished the first. It would be nice if you do not lower the bar by insults. I sense that is coming.

sr

I've asked you to address numerous concerns of mine, only to be rebuffed with naked assertions. Now you bring up an issue and we're not allowed to talk about anything else until we've resolved this issue to your satisfaction?

[_maklelan]

Jason15, yes you keep harping this, it's also apparent that a lot of Chrisitans have no idea what Mormons believe. Once they are told they absolutely do not accept Mormons as Christian.

You have no idea what happens, you're just assuming. Good grief, you really do think that you can speak authoritatively on behalf of all Christians just because you say so.

You can live in your fantasy world Maklelan....but the Christian God is not a Created being like your Mormon god. The Christian god does not resemble the Mormon god in any way....no matter how much you wish He did.

The fact is these studies your keep ranting about are bogus.

Obviously, since you've said so.

If these people were given the facts on Mormon beliefs there is no way they would consider Mormons Christian any more than Muslims etc.

Because you are the voice of Christianity.

[_Megacles]

the Christian God is not a Created being like your Mormon god. The Christian god does not resemble the Mormon god in any way....no matter how much you wish He did.

The fact is these studies your keep ranting about are bogus. If these people were given the facts on Mormon beliefs there is no way they would consider Mormons Christian any more than Muslims etc.

Jason15,

I can only assume that you, or your brand of Christianity (which you feel you represent) rejects the Bible. Is this the case?

[_Megacles]

Who was Christ talking to? You have degraded to an elementary discussion which I am not interested in with this question.

sr

The answer should be simple, sr1030. It is a valid question. Given a hypostatic entity in a given state, can it, at the same time, communicate with its other states?

Bump for sr1030.

[_sr1030]

If you don't need the analogy then why did you appeal to that misunderstanding of the rhetoric?

I don't understand this comment. I appealed to a misunderstanding of Rhetoric I supposedly provided?

Do you then agree that Christ stated that there is only one (1) true, real or genuine God? At least in this passage?

Yes, but I reject your interpretation of the comment and its cosmological significance.

It is not about my interpretation, but you apparently agree that he taught there is only one (1) true, real or genuine God. This being the case, you have been clearly shown where the LDS Church does not follow this very significant teaching of Christ. ....and logically not a Christian Church.

Why don't we finish with John 17:3 before you move on?

I don't think you're going to finish it, but go ahead and address my concern.

WE can finish this and are close if you would agree that it has nothing to do with my interpretation of the verse, it is a simple and clear teaching of Christ. If you can't agree to that then WE probably can just end the discussion all together. I would see no need to continue. I played by your rules.

Are you saying you can be a Christian and not believe the teachings of Christ?

Depends on the teachings.

This is not logical and I really don't think you would get many people to agree with you. You are saying you can reject certain teachings of Christ, yet still be a follower of Christ?

Do you believe his teaching about gouging out your eye if it's involved in sin. Do you believe his teaching about anyone who doesn't reject their family not being worthy of him?

I do believe Christ's teaching, is this the opening you are craving? I won't go for it. I will not defend my status as a Christian or a certain Church as Christian in this thread. We are discussing the LDS Church and its claim to being Christian. Not me or mine.

I've asked you to address numerous concerns of mine, only to be rebuffed with naked assertions. Now you bring up an issue and we're not allowed to talk about anything else until we've resolved this issue to your satisfaction?

what naked assertion?

sr

[_madeleine]

*shrug* I have no idea who you are, but your Biblical exegesis does not impress me as Christian in nature.

Well, just to save you the time, I am a biblical scholar, specializing in Israelite religion, Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls, and early Jewish and Christian identity. My exegesis is in line with the scholarly consensuses.

As I said, Israel struggled with pagan ideas, but these ideas are dropped post-exilic and there is no doubt, Israel does not believe in the existence of other gods. Most people view this as God leading His people to a true understanding.

I've already addressed this. You didn't respond to my concerns.

But, believe what you like, support your position with a pagan understanding and errors, but don't be surprised when Christians do not accept a religion that does so as Christian.

In other words, you can't defend your assertions, but you're still right. Your fundamentalism is showing, too.

Lookie here an ad hominem. Always where Mormons turn to.

I don't think you are understanding, at all. St. Paul was a Jew who held no belief in the existence of pagan gods. There, I called the Roman deities, gods, that must mean to you that I think the Roman gods exist.

I suggest you study the rest of Paul's writings to get a glimpse of his views on pagan gods. He calls them false, empty idols. There is a reason early Chritians were called atheists by the Romans.


As for fundamentalists, perhaps you should look in the mirror. The Mormon usage of Catholic scripture has commonalities with fundamentalism. The first being personal interpretation.

I'm Roman Catholic, and do appeal to an authority that you don't accept, the Catholic Church, guided by the Holy Spirit.

I remain unimpressed by someone who can't see that Jews are not polytheist. Something happened, something changed, no matter how much you want to deny the reality that is right in front of you. Hear oh Israel our Lord is ONE. One means one, there is no qualifier, of many.

As I said believe what you like. You haven't presented anything that convinces me Mormons have a Christian understanding of God.

[_maklelan]

Lookie here an ad hominem. Always where Mormons turn to.

I don't think you are understanding, at all. St. Paul was a Jew who held no belief in the existence of pagan gods. There, I called the Roman deities, gods, that must mean to you that I think the Roman gods exist.

The author of 1 Corinthians obviously believed there were real supernatural entities being worshipped through idols. Tell me, if those supernatural entities, called "gods" by Deuteronomy 32 as well as 1 Corinthians 8, were not actually gods, what were they? Do you have any other ontological category for them? As far as the Bible and the ancient Near East is concerned, demons = gods I don't like. Can you show otherwise, or can you only assert it?

I suggest you study the rest of Paul's writings to get a glimpse of his views on pagan gods. He calls them false, empty idols. There is a reason early Chritians were called atheists by the Romans.

I understand Paul's rhetoric as well as its literary and cultural context much better than you do. I suggest you take the time study it instead of just presupposing what it means and going out to find people who agree with you.

As for fundamentalists, perhaps you should look in the mirror. The Mormon usage of Catholic scripture has commonalities with fundamentalism. The first being personal interpretation.

And my exegesis has nothing to do with any kind of fundamentalism at all.

I'm Roman Catholic, and do appeal to an authority that you don't accept, the Catholic Church, guided by the Holy Spirit.

I remain unimpressed by someone who can't see that Jews are not polytheist.

I'm not trying to impress you, I'm trying to get you to defend your claims with something other than "Because I said so."

Something happened, something changed, no matter how much you want to deny the reality that is right in front of you. Hear oh Israel our Lord is ONE. One means one, there is no qualifier, of many.

And that qualifier is attached to the personal name YHWH, not the generic noun "god."

As I said believe what you like. You haven't presented anything that convinces me Mormons have a Christian understanding of God.

it's not the nature of dogmatism and fundamentalism to be convinced by logic and evidence. I'm under no illusion about that. I know you're not going to change your mind just because the evidence says you should. I'm here to challenge you to defend your claims on grounds other than dogmatic, and you have shown that you are absolutely unwilling and unable. In other words, this is not a "biblical approach" to the question of whether or not Mormons are Christians, it is a dogmatic approach, which is really the only approach that anyone who rejects the Christianity of Mormons will ever or can ever take.

[_madeleine]

I would like to know what you think the purpose of these other gods you believe in, is.

St. Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, the pagans. His message for them, of Christ crucified, being reconciled, was a message of the One True God, who desired their faith and fidelity.

What need does God have for these other gods? What does an empty idol have to do with the one true God?

What does the cult of Caesar, popular at the time of Paul, have to do with Christ? Caesar, being a real person, viewed as divine, is this one of the many gods that you believe exist?

I am not seeing why or how God, the One True God, has anything to do with pagan gods. All righteousness is in God. Where does this leave room for the existence of other gods, at all?

As a side note, a Jewish acquaintance once told me that Gentiles can worship whatever God(s) they like, but a Jew is required to worship the one true God of Israel. She did not mean, at all, that she believed other Gods were real.

I can't see how you think an expression by a Jew, that a demon can masquerade as a god, means a Jew believes a demon is a god. It does not align to Jewish belief, at all.

[_madeleine]

Lookie here an ad hominem. Always where Mormons turn to.

I don't think you are understanding, at all. St. Paul was a Jew who held no belief in the existence of pagan gods. There, I called the Roman deities, gods, that must mean to you that I think the Roman gods exist.

The author of 1 Corinthians obviously believed there were real supernatural entities being worshipped through idols. Tell me, if those supernatural entities, called "gods" by Deuteronomy 32 as well as 1 Corinthians 8, were not actually gods, what were they? Do you have any other ontological category for them? As far as the Bible and the ancient Near East is concerned, demons = gods I don't like. Can you show otherwise, or can you only assert it?

I suggest you study the rest of Paul's writings to get a glimpse of his views on pagan gods. He calls them false, empty idols. There is a reason early Chritians were called atheists by the Romans.

I understand Paul's rhetoric as well as its literary and cultural context much better than you do. I suggest you take the time study it instead of just presupposing what it means and going out to find people who agree with you.

As for fundamentalists, perhaps you should look in the mirror. The Mormon usage of Catholic scripture has commonalities with fundamentalism. The first being personal interpretation.

And my exegesis has nothing to do with any kind of fundamentalism at all.

I'm Roman Catholic, and do appeal to an authority that you don't accept, the Catholic Church, guided by the Holy Spirit.

I remain unimpressed by someone who can't see that Jews are not polytheist.

I'm not trying to impress you, I'm trying to get you to defend your claims with something other than "Because I said so."

Something happened, something changed, no matter how much you want to deny the reality that is right in front of you. Hear oh Israel our Lord is ONE. One means one, there is no qualifier, of many.

And that qualifier is attached to the personal name YHWH, not the generic noun "god."

As I said believe what you like. You haven't presented anything that convinces me Mormons have a Christian understanding of God.

it's not the nature of dogmatism and fundamentalism to be convinced by logic and evidence. I'm under no illusion about that. I know you're not going to change your mind just because the evidence says you should. I'm here to challenge you to defend your claims on grounds other than dogmatic, and you have shown that you are absolutely unwilling and unable. In other words, this is not a "biblical approach" to the question of whether or not Mormons are Christians, it is a dogmatic approach, which is really the only approach that anyone who rejects the Christianity of Mormons will ever or can ever take.

No, they are empty idols. I'm finding it difficult to believe you haven't read that the idols are nothing but wood and stone.

I think you demonstrate well, the paganization of Christianity. I don't know that all Mormons believe as you, but you have my prayers.

Peace be with you.

Ps: I am not a Bible scholar. :) I do enjoy reading the Bible and of the Bible. New Testament Wright is a favorite, and I enjoy the Brazos commentaries. I wouldn't call these my opinions or dogmatic. In the end, you are not taking Christian scholarship seriously, and I cannot take Mormon scholarship seriously. Not for dogmatic reasons, for logic reasons. Beginning with, the all-everything attributes of God cannot logically be shared by other gods and still be all-everything. In other words, I think the Mormon argument for a plurality of gods is an argument falling down stairs.

[_maklelan]

No, they are empty idols. I'm finding it difficult to believe you haven't read that the idols are nothing but wood and stone.

Yes, I've read that rhetoric many more times than you have, and in many more languages. I've also read other rhetoric found in the same books that acknowledges that there is a real entity represented by the idol, as is the case in Deut 32 and 1 Cor 10. I've already made this argument. You've not responded except to say "Nu-uh!" Please provide an argument if you don't like my reading.

I think you demonstrate well, the paganization of Christianity. I don't know that all Mormons believe as you, but you have my prayers.

Peace be with you.

Ps: I am not a Bible scholar. :) I do enjoy reading the Bible and of the Bible. New Testament Wright is a favorite, and I enjoy the Brazos commentaries. I wouldn't call these my opinions or dogmatic. In the end, you are not taking Christian scholarship seriously,

That's untrue. Every time I get up at a conference to present a paper or respond to one, I know I'm standing in front of mostly Evangelical Christians, and many of them are going to challenge me. I take the scholarship very seriously, but I also know its weaknesses, which is why I invite challenges. "Nu-uh!" is not a challenge, though.

and I cannot take Mormon scholarship seriously.

I'm not giving you Mormon scholarship, I'm giving you secular scholarship.

Not for dogmatic reasons, for logic reasons. Beginning with, the all-everything attributes of God cannot logically be shared by other gods and still be all-everything.

And yet you accept the hypostatic union, which has never been anything but a logical impossibility that is still accepted just because. You will appeal to logic when it serves you. When it doesn't, you will ignore it. That's still textbook dogmatism.

In other words, I think the Mormon argument for a plurality of gods is an argument falling down stairs.

Fine. What about the atheist, Christian, Jewish, and agnostic arguments in contemporary scholarship that consider the Bible and ancient Judaism thoroughly polytheistic? That is, after all, where I'm coming from. You keep trying to level the presumption that I'm just spewing Mormonism against my claims, when I'm doing no such thing. This is the academic consensus among scholars of all stripes, believing and non. It cannot be flippantly brushed aside by barking "Mormonism!"