The Mormon Jesus | Boundless Line

The Mormon Jesus
by Motte Brown on 10/06/2008 at 11:02 AM

If someone asked, could you effectively explain the differences between Mormonism and Christianity? I'm not certain I could. Sure, I know something about how Mormons do not believe in the Trinity or that Jesus is God in the same way Christians do. And I could probably score some points discrediting Mormon Church founder Joseph Smith about historically unsubstantiated golden tablets and The Lost Book of Arbraham hoax.

All pretty crazy stuff if you ask me. And I said as much to a Mormon Missionary once. To which he replied, "People said Jesus was crazy too." Touche, I thought.

That's why I really appreciated this article from First Things titled "Is Mormonism Christian?" In it, Gerald R. McDermott, Jordan-Trexler Professor of Religion at Roanoke College and author, makes a clear case that Mormonism isn't Christian mainly because "the Jesus proclaimed by Joseph Smith and his followers is different in significant ways from the Jesus of the New Testament."

According to Mormon doctrine:

Jesus is a God distinct from God the Father
Jesus was once merely a man and not God
Jesus is of the same species as human beings
Jesus's being and acts are limited by coeternal matter and laws

By focusing just on Jesus, McDermott concludes that "Mormon beliefs diverge widely from historic Christian orthodoxy." Nevermind all that other crazy stuff.

Faith | Mail This | Share on Facebook

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

1. Stephanie said the following at 12:06 PM on Oct 6:

Confused about number three. How could Jesus be a man without belonging to the same specie as human beings?

2. brian/earl said the following at 12:42 PM on Oct 6:

Stephanie,

Further clarification on #3 is found in the article.

"Because, for Mormons, Jesus was once as we are now, he is no different in kind from what we are. He shares our species. Like Jesus, we never had a beginning but are coeternal with God. According to Joseph Smith’s Doctrines and Covenants, our “intelligence” always existed; it “was not created or made” (D&C 93:29). According to the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, “In due time that intelligence was given a spirit body, becoming the spirit child of God the Eternal Father, and his beloved companion, the Mother in Heaven.”
Because we are all of the same species and nature, potentially divine and realized divinities, we are all on the same path of progression—if we take advantage of it. “Then they shall be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them” (D&C 132:20). The upshot is that, for Latter-day Saints, Jesus is ontologically no different from other human beings. He fully realized his potential, but we have the same potential. He is simply at the end of the progression along which we too can proceed. We can one day possess even Jesus’ omniscience and omnipotence.
For the orthodox tradition, in contrast, God is qadosh: “wholly other.” There is what Kierkegaard called an “infinite qualitative difference” between the human and divine. We will never be able to attain Jesus’ nature and powers. "

3. Dani said the following at 1:06 PM on Oct 6:

3
Going along with #2, God was also once a man. The Mormon missionaries I spoke with this summer explained to me that God is a six-foot-tall man. He now lives with Heavenly Mother in the cosmos. Each person on Earth is a child of God and Heavenly Mother; Lucifer is one of our spirit brothers who was denied a body because of his rebellion.

Also interesting--Jesus is referred to as Jehovah in his "pre-mortal" state. In his pre-mortal state, Adam was Michael the archangel.

Simply put, Mormonism is a disgusting distortion of Christian truth, and sadly, many Mormons do not learn the deep lies until they are fully immersed in the religion and its community.

4. Kathleen said the following at 1:06 PM on Oct 6:

Yeah, I'm confused right along with Stephanie (#1). If Jesus was fully man and fully God, wouldn't that make him of the same species?

5. Joseph said the following at 1:19 PM on Oct 6:

I think it is important to note the difference between understanding the doctrine of other faiths and how we ought to approach adherents to the said faith. Just as there are many self-proclaiming Christians who do not know the doctrines of bibilical Christianity, there are many adherents to mormonism (or Jevohahs's Witnesses) who do not know or claim all the doctrines of their faith.
When reaching out to love them in an attempt to introduce them to the true Christ we cannot automatically assume they beleive all of the wacky doctrines we can google. We ought to approach them in love (after we have earned the right to be heard) not as though we are attacking them but in such a way we are genuinely concerned for them and their misguidance.

6. Laura said the following at 1:27 PM on Oct 6:

Stephanie -- the point of that is to say that Jesus was JUST a human who BECAME a man. Christians have always affirmed that Jesus is one person with TWO natures (or "species" if you want to use the language of #3 above): a human nature and a God-nature, united in one person.

I've been hammering away at my 8th grade students about this issue -- we MUST be able to identify the differences between Christianity and heresy. Heck, the reason half these heresies (Mormonism, JWs, scientology) popped up in the last century is because people had stopped educating themselves about ancient heresies and combating them with the Gospel. We get apathetic and people start straying from the faith. Bad deal!

7. Jacob said the following at 1:39 PM on Oct 6:

Stephanie,
Christ has two natures: he is both fully God and fully human. However, there is only one person who possesses these natures. There are not two Jesuses (one divine and the other human), nor does Jesus change from being divine to being human to being divine again. He is simultaneously divine and human.

Another clear distinction between mormonism and Christianity is that only Christianity teaches that man is saved by grace alone. Mormonism teaches that we get to heaven by works. Further, since there are three levels of heaven that you go to depending on how many good works you go to, their gods are not holy, since they can tolerate sin.

8. brx said the following at 2:09 PM on Oct 6:

How about: Mormons don't follow Christ alone, they follow the apostles of the Mormon church. And, they don't discern truth by the same methods that followers of Christ are supposed to. ??

Grace & peace,

9. Texas Craig said the following at 2:43 PM on Oct 6:

I certainly agree that Mormon doctrine is unbiblical and presents a Jesus other than what the Biblical gospel presents.

But, I agree with the commenter above that we need to be sure to not assume that everyone that considers themselves a Mormon believes all of the doctrine of their faith. Rather, I think it is good to try to find common ground with them first, then try to explore whether they really believe some of the more unorthodox beliefs. With some Mormons that I talked to in the past, it turns out they really did not hold to those unorthodox beliefs and had a pretty orthodox belief system.

10. Seth R. said the following at 5:58 PM on Oct 6:

OK, to address McDermott's original points...

First off, you have to understand that Mormon theology does not view the unity of God as a numerical unity - but rather as a unity of purpose, perfections, and attributes. And a unity of perfect love. "God" is a unity of distinct individual identities.

We view the Father and Son as being perfectly in harmony with each other. To know the mind of one is to know the mind of the other. Furthermore, we believe that the Son has willingly allowed his will to be "swallowed up" in that of the Father. This unity, this perichoresis, is far more than simply playing for the same team. They are in perfect unison.

Yet they remain distinct individuals. They are not one substance. They are not numerically equivalent. We consider any assertion that they are to be un-biblical.

So it is simply inaccurate for McDermott to say that Mormons believe that "Jesus is a God distinct from God the Father."

It would be more accurate to say that "Jesus is a distinct BEING from the Father, but Jesus is not a distinct GOD from the Father." He can only be God in unison with the Father.

11. Laura said the following at 6:12 PM on Oct 6:

One of my old professors summed up the difference pretty well: we just disagree on the nature of God, the nature of humanity, and the relationship between the two.

12. Seth R. said the following at 6:12 PM on Oct 6:

Second point:

"Jesus was once merely a man and not God"

and

"Jesus is of the same species as human beings"

These are related and can be addressed together.

First, it is far from clear from Mormon scripture and prophetic utterance that Jesus was ever anything other than fully divine. So simple blanket-statements about what Jesus was or was not way back when are inappropriate. We don't know much about what Jesus, the Father, or any of us were doing before God called the Council in Heaven.

Now, let's be perfectly clear - There is no such thing as "merely human" in Mormon thought. For us, humanity is divine. The literal spirit offspring of God and created in His literal image.

So we don't consider Jesus' humanity to be a negative in the slightest.

Christians already believe that Jesus was born human of Mary. So I don't see what is particularly theologically upsetting about the notion of God being human. Yours already was, and is.

The real problem here is the artificial ontological divide that traditional Christianity has drawn between the Creator (God) and the created (everything else - including us). Mormons reject this ontological division.

For Mormons all matter is eternal. Furthermore, all human identity is eternal. It was never created ex nihilo (out of nothing). Mormon theology declares that all creation is creation ex materia (creation from pre-existing materials).

Mormons feel that the traditional Christian notion of creation ex nihilo comes from the faulty human assumption that to rule over something or have power over something, you must have power to destroy it, to annihilate it, to cause it to cease existing.

This is zero sum thinking, and has an implicit sense of nihilism. And we reject such views of power, omnipotence, and rule. God does not need to be able to cause things to "be-not" in order to be God. We also recoil from the idea that there was ever nothingness in any sense. Our cosmos truly is eternal.

13. Jeremy said the following at 8:29 PM on Oct 6:

Maybe this will clear up some confusion. God the father is nothing more than an exalted man. He has a wife: the heavenly mother (as someone already mentioned). Together, as exalted people, they had sexual relations and produced many, many "spirit babies." Those spirit babies are all humans, Jesus, all angels, and all demons. We existed before earth did. At some point there was a rebellion, staged by Satan. All those that joined him are the present demons. All those opposed (who sided with God the Father) are the angels. Jesus was also on God's side and was especially loyal; He was given special authority/power. All humans took neither side in the rebellion and were forced to go through a veil (where we lose all our pre-earth memories) and to become human on this earth where we have a "second chance" to show our loyalty to God the Father. As a rather strange factoid, Jesus was conceived by God the Father having literal sexual relations with Mary. At judgment, most humans will make it to heaven. Only apostates to the church (Mormon) will actually go to the "outer darkness" (i.e. hell). There are three levels to heaven: telestial (non-believers), terrestial (for really good people or Mormons who haven't met all the requirements for the highest level) and celestial (the highest level of heaven reserved for mormons who have kept all the laws). The celestial kingdom also allows you to become exalted as a god, like God the Father. (Sorry ladies, you just get to be wives there.) Anyway, that was probably more than necessary. But you can see how we are the same "species" as Jesus. Jesus and Satan are brothers, in fact.

I've known a number of Mormons and also found some to contradict their own beliefs in discussion. I'm not sure if this is because they are misinformed, or because they use as a defensive tactic (to make themselves appear Christian.)

P.S. If you're curious about this topic, I highly recommend "Unmasking Mormonism" by R. Philip Roberts.

14. Jeremy said the following at 8:30 PM on Oct 6:

Oops...that would "Mormonism Unmasked" by R. Philip Roberts. My bad.

15. Matthew S. said the following at 9:26 PM on Oct 6:

I would agree with Joseph and Texas Craig that some Mormons probably don't believe or even understand some of the far out doctrines of the Latter-Day Saints church, and we need to learn what a specific individual believes rather than their church in general (although there may be a time and place to point out what the LDS church believes). I'd add that perhaps the most important thing to focus on with a member of any cult is not the really strange, aberrant theology. I've talked with Jehovah's witness for hours on end, without making much headway. They've always seemed pretty comfortable debating subjects like the Trinity or Christ's being God. The only time I've seen a really strong, even angry response is when I discuss the issue of salvation by works versus salvation as a free gift without works. When the discussion comes down to THEIR works (and they do a lot of them) not being enough to save them, it seems to touch a raw nerve. It might also keep them from being on the defensive of their cult, since you can explain that members of every religion have accepted the lie of adding works to salvation (including many who would consider themselves Christians and have orthodox views of Christ). This faith versus law aspect of salvation can be an inroad, and the stranger cult teachings can perhaps be dealt with once a person opens up more (Of course, God works in different ways with different people, so rely on His guiding for what to focus on when sharing Christ--I'm sure Mormons have had their eyes opened by seeing problems in the Book of Mormon).

That being said, to whatever extent a Mormon does believe the stranger cult teachings, a Christian witnessing to him needs to try to establish a Biblical cosmology and worldview. Before a Mormon can believe in Christ of the Bible and be saved, He has to believe in God as the Bible defines Him. A caution would be that many Mormons today use far more evangelical-sounding language than those in the past, so it might be easy to think they agree with us on more than they do.

By the way, thinking of worldviews, it seems that many cults with a Christian veneer masking a bizarre cosmology have done a better job communicating their cosmology than most Christians have. Jehovah's Witnesses have great literature and graphics explaining their worldview. That's probably part of why so many supposedly saved evangelical Christians end up joining these cults. We need to communicate our cosmology--creation, the origin of sin and death and suffering, who God is, and a sacrifice paying for sin--better than we have been to believers and unbelievers. In other words, we need to teach the foundations of Genesis and the rest of the Old Testament better.

16. Kaye said the following at 11:07 PM on Oct 6:

As a Catholic, I always wince when I see stuff like this. People spin Catholic doctrine to make it sound crazy all the time.

It's true that the differences between Protestants and Mormons are far more pronounced than differences between Protestants and Catholics. And since I think my own belief system is correct, I'm certainly not going to try to legitimize Mormon theology.

But the Mormons I know believe in sinful human condition and that Jesus died for their sins so they might have life in his name. Much of Mormonism might be bunk, but what's more Christian than that?

17. James said the following at 12:24 AM on Oct 7:

As one born and bred in Salem, VA (where Roanoke College is located), this makes me happy :).

As a resident of Phoenix, AZ now, I also have to recommend to all y'all (yes, that was an intentional usage of the plural form of y'all =p) the works of James White, namely "Letters to a Mormon Elder," and "The Forgotten Trinity." He's also got a great ministry called alpha and omega ministries: www.aomin.org

Definitely recommend Dr. White if you're looking for digging even deeper into how to witness to mormons, specifically those who are really good at mormon apologetics.

18. alex said the following at 12:53 AM on Oct 7:

Glad to hear that this distinction is being made. When I was younger Mormons were always classified as Christians, at least where I'm from, and I don't appreciate having that kind of reputation!

19. Kathryn said the following at 2:39 AM on Oct 7:

Mormons don't believe that Jesus' death on the cross paid for our sins, once for all, so that we can be made righteous in the eyes of God the Father, and that it is by faith alone in Jesus' death and resurrection for our sins that gets us into heaven.

Is that right?

20. Karen said the following at 6:35 AM on Oct 7:

Another good book is "So What's the Difference." It outlines the differences and similarities between major world religions and Christianity.

21. mary kate said the following at 9:19 AM on Oct 7:

i don't have any backup for this, but i always understood that mormons believe that you can 'earn' your salvation. so that's kind of a problem.

one of things that always blew me away about mormonism is the lack of character some of it's early leaders displayed. joseph smith was REALLY shady. how can you believed in any religion someone who's that sketchy would start?

i read a book called 'under the banner of heaven' by jon krakauer (the 'into the wild' guy). it was fantastic. it was more about the fundamentalist (ie polygamy-practicing & under warren jeffs) mormons, but gave some great insight into the religion's early history.

22. Nate said the following at 9:59 AM on Oct 7:

Seth writes (#12):

What Seth is saying with the term "ontological" is the Mormon jingle: "As man is, God once was; as God is, man may be."

And that's why Mormons are not Christians.

The goal of godhood is precisely how the serpent enticed the woman in the garden.

Let's have none of this nonsense that Mormonism is compatible with biblical Christianity. The two are as different as night and day.

And if a Mormon ever suggests otherwise, ask him why he's trying to convert you.

23. Matthew S. said the following at 10:49 AM on Oct 7:

Kathryn,

Mormons don't believe Jesus paid for our sins on the cross, but rather in the garden of Gethsemene.

More importantly, they would say that faith saves us, but not "faith alone." To quote the 12th president of the LDS church, "One of the most fallacious doctrines originated by Satan and propounded by man is that man is saved alone by the grace of God; that belief in Jesus Christ alone is all that is needed for salvation" (Miracle of Forgiveness, Spencer W. Kimball, p. 206.)

Basically, Mormons view Christ's sacrifice as important, but not sufficient (i.e. it only makes it possible for us to earn our own salvation and makes up for our inadequecies). A popular quote: "We know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do," (2 Nephi 25:23). Instead of paying for our sins, Christ's work is viewed as the extra "push" the helps us get into heaven.

What's more frightening than hearing this from a cult is how many mainline Christian denominations and even some evangelicals, while disagreeing on much else, agree with the Mormon view that "faith alone in Christ alone" does not save. The apostle Paul would respond to such, "I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain." (Galatians 2:21)

24. niki said the following at 11:06 AM on Oct 7:

Kaye #16 -
'But the Mormons I know believe in sinful human condition and that Jesus died for their sins so they might have life in his name. Much of Mormonism might be bunk, but what's more Christian than that?'

This is where a lot of confusion comes when discussing Christian cults, as Christian cults do contain elements of the truth (as do most other religions). Because God has made himself known clearly (see the first 2 chapters of Romans), man does have an idea of what He is like, and so there are elements of His truth everywhere. BUT, just because something contains ELEMENTS of truth, does not mean that it IS true. The same is true for the Mormon church. It is a cult that was formed by people who had been in the Christian church, and therefore, contains Christian thoughts and ideas. However, a close look at the creeds of both churches will show you that Mormonism, while espousing some Christian tenets and language, is NOT part of the orthodox, universal, Christian church (which includes catholics, protestants, and orthodox christians).

25. Jim H said the following at 12:37 PM on Oct 7:

Seth R. #12

-------------------------------
"The real problem here is the artificial ontological divide that traditional Christianity has drawn between the Creator (God) and the created (everything else - including us). Mormons reject this ontological division."
--------------------------------

COMMENT: That is pretty much the definition of Pantheism.

I attended the recent Ligonier Conference in Scottsdale, Az whose theme was "Tough Questions Christians Face" and I believe it was John MaCarthur who said that Mormonism is one of the most pagan religions on the planet and the belief that you just posted confirms that assertion. In fact Mormanism was born in the mind of Satan (like all other false religions)- salvation is works-based and therefore appeals to man's pride, while having an attractive wrapping of superficial morality which belies its danger.

26. BDB said the following at 1:40 PM on Oct 7:

Hmmm...I'm thinking about the Protestants who are adamantly anti-Catholic. Then Evangelicals on the world stage tried to speak against abortion...and the only ones standing with them were the Catholics and Catholic countries...the secular Americans were busy trying to force the rest of the world to do more abortions. It opened a dialog between Protestants and Catholics to understand the common theological ground.

Today, the Mormons are carrying the load on the pro-marriage amendment to California's constitution. They're funding it, they're putting shoe leather on the ground to encourage people to vote for it. If it passes, everyone in Orthodox Christianity is going to have to thank the Mormons.

My prayer is that this will open up a lot more dialog between Mormons and encourage some open discussion on why Orthodox theology differs. The Worldwide Church of God was once a cult. There came a point where they opened up and asked people to come in and examine their theology. They became much more Orthodox as a result. Given how many standard Bibles that Mormons are carrying around, there's no reason why God can't do the same thing with them.

27. Jim H. said the following at 2:36 PM on Oct 7:

BDB, #26

You are confusing a sober assessment of Mormon theology with being anti-Mormon. That may be the case in some instances but is not the case with me.

My mother is Baptist and her second husband is Mormon. She loves him dearly, but does not believe Mormanism to be true and retained her Baptist beliefs. I too care a lot about this man and greatly respect him. In fact, I attended a Mormon service with him and afterwards debated two of their Elders. Our relationship is very good but that does not stop me from discussing with him the errors of Mormon theology.

We seem to live in a society where people jump to the conclusion that if you strongly disagree with someone on important matters, that you are "anti-that person," which is not always the case.

Lastly, the fact that Catholics and Mormons are standing up more strongly to abortion and other key issues is more of an indictment on the weakness of evangelicals than anything else. I applaud them and encourage them as well, but that will not stop me from confronting them on heretical theology.

28. Alma said the following at 3:25 PM on Oct 7:

This article begins by citing Gerald McDermott's comments at First Things where also appear Bruce Porter's comments asserting fundamental Mormon theology. After referring to claims about our theology, including the idea that we believe that salvation can come by works, Porter says, "All of these statements are false, and they reflect incomprehension of Mormon beliefs and doctrine." Even though they're repeated above, they're still false. McDermott's summary point that "Jesus was once merely a man and not God" is also false.

29. Seth R. said the following at 3:51 PM on Oct 7:

Don't mistake me. I'm not particularly concerned whether you consider me to be "Christian" or not. I'm not interested in joining anyone's club, or trying to "fit in," or be "just like you." All I care about is that my faith is accurately portrayed.

As for whether Mormons are "Christian" or not, I'm undecided. I can see good points on both sides. So I see no particular reason to wade into that debate.

But to clarify things...

First off, Mormons do not believe that the Atonement happened only in the Garden of Gethsemane. There may be popular misunderstanding on this point, but the informed Mormon doctrinal perspective is that the sufferings of the Garden returned to Christ in full measure upon the cross. And of course, it was on the cross that the presence of the Father was withdrawn from Christ, leaving him truly alone and causing him to cry "My God, why hast thou forsaken me?"

So it isn't a case of the Garden supplanting the cross. We believe the Atonement happened in both locations.

As for Nate's point about Satan tempting Eve with the promise of being like God, this proves little. Something isn't untrue just because Satan said it. Even devils truthfully exclaimed that Jesus was the Son of God (for which Jesus rebuked them). Jesus didn't need the testimony of devils and rightfully silenced them. But that doesn't mean the words of those evil spirits was false.

Satan often uses half-truths mixed with lies. Mormon belief is that his statement in the Garden of Eden was one of these instances - something that was partly true, but mixed with deceit.

Finally, the promise that we can become "like God" is laced throughout the New Testament:

2 Peter 1:3-4; John 10:34-36; Acts 17:28-29; Eph 1:5; Eph 3:19; Eph 4:13, 15; Rom 5:2; Rom 8:14-19, 29-32; Col 3:3, 10; Eph 4:23-24; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16 and 6:17; Gal 2:20; Phil 1:21; 1 Thess 5:23; 2 Thess 2:14; 1 John 4:17; John 17:22; Rev 21:7; 1 John 3:2; Phil 3:21

Please note, I am NOT citing these verses in an attempt to prove that there is no ontological divide between God and man. While these verses are in harmony with that position, they do not prove it - so please don't assume that I think I've proven anything here. I only cite these verses to show that Satan's remark about being "like God" is repeated many times in scripture, and the mere fact that Satan said it too proves absolutely nothing.

As for Jim's remark about Mormons being pantheists...

Pantheism literally means "God is All" and "All is God". It is the view that everything is of an all-encompassing immanent abstract God; or that the Universe, or nature, and God are equivalent.

We do not believe this.

I do not worship the universe. I worship a person - God the Father (and the Son and Spirit - since they partake in the divinity of the Father). I do not worship a universal law. I do not worship Mother Earth. I see no reason why the mere fact that I believe that the fundamental elements that comprise our planet are eternal requires me to worship the planet.

This simply proves my point that traditional Christianity operates from the assumption that the power to destroy is the only ultimate power. That creation is nothing worth reverence-ing unless it also comes bundled with an absolute power to unmake and annihilate.

Why does God have to be ontologically separate. Why must he be the only eternal thing out there? Just because something has always existed does not mean I have to worship it. I worship God alone. Not the universe.

30. Jim H. said the following at 5:14 PM on Oct 7:

Seth R. #29
The best Biblical support I can find for creation ex nihilo is Hebrews 11:3 (NIV)

by faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.

So either God made the universe out of nothing or the pre-universe was some kind of blob of invisible material that he made visible. The former supposition seems more likely than the latter.

But what I find most disturbing and blaspemous is the claim the people are divine. To say that we are made in the image of God means that we share some of his attributes (rationality, moral sense of right and wrong among other things) but that does not mean we share the substance of what makes Him God and everything else NOT god - his eternality, omnipotence, omniscience, absolute holiness, etc. That appears to be why you want to connect people ontologically with God, so you can make that claim.

31. BDB said the following at 5:27 PM on Oct 7:

Jim H (#27) wrote:

>>You are confusing a sober assessment of Mormon theology with being anti-Mormon. <<

Hmmm...not sure I'm any more confused about this than, say, the theology of The Shack. There are several prominent writers, much-beloved in the Evangelical community, whose best-selling books have theological problems, too. I prefer to direct everyone back to the Bible, and to not focus on any of the non-Scriptural writings out there.

For those who are very concerned about an emphasis on "works," well, even the ESV includes the book of James, right?

32. farmer Tom said the following at 5:52 PM on Oct 7:

I do not worship the universe. I worship a person - God the Father (and the Son and Spirit - since they partake in the divinity of the Father).

Typical Mormon language.

I do not worship a person. I worship (Elohim) God. The Alpha and Omega. The I AM that I AM.

While I may have a personal relationship with Him, He is not a person He is God.

since they partake in the divinity of the Father

This is also a false statement.

Jesus Christ is God. He is not some person claiming to be God, He is not some man who earned God status.

Colossians 2:9 "9For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

While Jesus Christ is a separate entity within the Godhead, He is the Son, the bodily evidence of the Godhead, fully man and fully God.

John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

John1:14 "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."

According to John, the Word was God and the Word was made flesh. Jesus Christ did not start as a man and become God, rather, He was God and took on the form of a man,(a human body). He is fully God and fully man.

John 10:30
"I and my Father are one."

The God of the Bible is a triune God. If you would like to discuss that, I will be glad to go there with you, but, you obviously do no understand that fact that Jesus Christ is both God and Man, therefore your understanding of the Triune God will be limited.

33. Jim H. said the following at 5:59 PM on Oct 7:

Alma #28,
Strictly speaking, it is indeed false to say the Mormons believe in salvation by works and my previous comment did not fully expound the Mormon concept. It is more correct to say that Mormons believe in universalism, or universal salvation,(after 1,000 years of hell for unbelievers) and that the level of reward is by works.

The three kingdoms in ascending order of glory are as follows:
1) Telestial Kingdom. After those who reject Christ serve 1,000 years in hell during the Millenium, those souls go to the lowest kingdom - the Telestial kingdom. From Wikipedia:

"Smith taught that individuals in the telestial kingdom will be servants of God, but "where God and Christ dwell they cannot come, worlds without end";however, they will receive the ministration of the Holy Ghost and beings from the terrestrial kingdom.Despite these limitations, in LDS theology being resident in the telestial kingdom is not an unpleasant experience: "the glory of the telestial ... surpasses all understanding".

2. Terrestrial Kingdom - (from Wikipedia) According to Doctrine and Covenants section 76, those who will inhabit the terrestrial kingdom include those who lived respectably but "were blinded by the craftiness of men" and thus rejected the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ (Mormonism) when it was presented to them during their mortal lives.

3. Celestial Kingdom - (from Wikipedia)
The celestial kingdom will be the residence of those who have been righteous, accepted the teachings of Mormonism, and made and lived up to all of the required ordinances and covenants during their mortal lives.It will also be the residence of those individuals that accepted and received the ordinances and covenants in the post-mortal spirit world.All children who die before the age of eight automatically inherit the celestial kingdom. The celestial kingdom will also be the permanent residence of God the Father and Jesus Christ.

So basically everyone will experience a pleasant afterlife but the reprobate (presumably Hitler and the like) will first have to experience 1,000 years of hell before inheriting the Telestial kingdom.

34. farmer Tom said the following at 6:03 PM on Oct 7:

Again you are confused. God is eternal, the universe is not. If you reject the eternal, infinite nature of the Creator God, then He is simply another creature, born/evolved into a pre-existing universe.

I will not give all the references, but Scripture clearly shows that God pre-existed His creation. Here's one,

Job 38:4" Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;"

35. Charles H. said the following at 6:47 PM on Oct 7:

Nate #22 - Well said.

Although I have several theological objections to what Mormonism teaches, many of which have been addressed above, I'm equally put off by the dishonest way that its "missionaries" promote it. The general message is "Hi, we're Christians just like you, except that we believe something different, except that it isn't different, but..." In short it is deceptive; obviously if the canvassers believed that my beliefs were comparable to theirs, they would not be attempting to convert me. Can you imagine a Christian missionary telling a Buddhist, "That's great that you're Buddhist! We're just like the Buddhists, only with a few differences!"

No. It is a separate system of beliefs (I don't want to glorify it with the word "religion"). For one thing, it has different books that it considers holy. Jews have the Torah, Muslims have the Koran, and Christians have the Bible. Not "the Bible and," but "the Bible." Mormons have the Bible and three other books. Of the four, the Bible is the only one they do *not* consider inerrant, or devoid of error. Their door-to-door guys try to obfuscate this with language like "we believe it's inerrant in its original text," but the bottom line is the same: they hold English translations of the other three books they call holy to be inerrant, but they do not consider the Bible to be. Again, this is dishonest and an attempt to hide what Mormons actually believe.

If one of my friends said that he considered himself Jewish, but believed in a different holy book, different conception of God, and different prophets, I'd think "You can call yourself what you please, and you may be Jewish culturally, but you aren't Jewish in the religious sense." Same goes here.

Please visit a website like CARM for more information on the differences between Mormonism and Christianity.

36. Ashley said the following at 7:15 PM on Oct 7:

Last week I was at a friend's apartment having Bible study when three female mormon missionaries knocked on the door. We invited them in and talked for a long time. I thought it was clear that we were firm in our beliefs, so I was surprised when they took out the book of Mormon and tried to convert us. They said many times that our beliefs and their beliefs were very similar and that the only difference was that they believed in modern day revelation.

They were genuinely nice women. They listened and were kind. But in the end they wanted us to believe we serve the same Jesus they do. And that simply isn't true.

37. Kaye said the following at 8:07 PM on Oct 7:

Jim H, #27

The first thing Protestants always ask me about are the saints, Purgatory, and indulgences. In that order. Every time.

I wish, I so wish that, just once, they'd ask about the core tenets of my faith. The Eucharist. The Atonement. Social justice and preferential option for the poor and vulnerable.

I'm guessing the Mormons wish for the same. Ask them what they think is most important. They've got nothing to hide.

38. Timothy said the following at 9:19 PM on Oct 7:

Perhaps it sounds reasonable to argue we should try and find "common ground" with those who say they are brothers but who are full of deception. But this position is just not Biblical.

Check it out, our response to "brothers" who are false teachers is to separate ourselves from them or to rebuke them, BUT NOT to find common ground. Romans 16:17&18; Titus 3:10&11; 2 Timothy 4:2-4.

I know some may argue that Jesus ate with sinners. Yes, he ate with nonbelievers and he preached the truth and told them to go and sin no more. Jesus knew their hearts. But with those who choose to deceive, the Bible is clear: "beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."

39. Common guy said the following at 10:01 PM on Oct 7:

Seth R. #12 -

Christians already believe that Jesus was born human of Mary. So I don't see what is particularly theologically upsetting about the notion of God being human.

Is it correct that Mormons believe that God used to be a man on another world and that he became a god through exaltation by following the laws of the god he served on another world? Is there a progression of gods as far back as you can go in time?

What references from The Bible support the matter is eternal and not created?

40. Mormons Are Christian said the following at 3:50 AM on Oct 8:

Mormons Are New Testament Christians, not Creedal Christians

The Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) is often accused by Evangelical pastors of not believing in Christ and, therefore, not being a Christian religion. This article helps to clarify such misconceptions by examining early Christianity's theology relating to baptism, the Godhead, the deity of Jesus Christ and His Atonement.

Baptism:

Early Christian churches, practiced baptism of youth (not infants) by immersion by the father of the family. The local congregation had a lay ministry. An early Christian Church has been re-constructed at the Israel Museum, and the above can be verified. The Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) continues baptism and a lay ministry as taught by Jesus’ Apostles. Early Christians were persecuted for keeping their practices sacred, and prohibiting non-Christians from witnessing them.

The Trinity:

A literal reading of the New Testament points to God and Jesus Christ , His Son , being separate , divine beings , united in purpose. . To whom was Jesus praying in Gethsemane, and Who was speaking to Him and his apostles on the Mount of Transfiguration? The Nicene Creed”s definition of the Trinity was influenced by scribes translating the Greek manuscripts into Latin. The scribes embellished on a passage explaining the Trinity , which is the Catholic and Protestant belief that God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The oldest versions of the epistle of 1 John, read: "There are three that bear witness: the Spirit, the water and the blood and these three are one." Scribes later added "the Father, the Word and the Spirit," and it remained in the epistle when it was translated into English for the King James Version, according to Dr. Bart Ehrman, Chairman of the Religion Department at UNC- Chapel Hill. He no longer believes in the Nicene Trinity. . Scholars agree that Early Christians believed in an embodied God; it was neo-Platonist influences that later turned Him into a disembodied Spirit. Harper’s Bible Dictionary entry on the Trinity says “the formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the New Testament.” The Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) views the Trinity as three separate divine beings , in accord with the earliest Greek New Testament manuscripts.

Theosis

Divinization, narrowing the space between God and humans, was also part of Early Christian belief. St. Athanasius of Alexandria (Eastern Orthodox) wrote, regarding theosis, "The Son of God became man, that we might become God." . The Gospel of Thomas (which pre-dates the 4 Gospels, but was considered non-canonical by the Nicene Council) quotes the Savior: "He who will drink from my mouth will become as I am: I myself shall become he, and the things that are hidden will be revealed to him," (Gospel of Thomas 50, 28-30, Nag Hammadi Library in English, J.M.Robinson, 1st ed 1977; 3rd ed. 1988) The Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) agrees with Athanasius and Thomas regarding theosis.

In the words of an LDS Apostle, Bruce R. McConkie: "There is and can only be one who is supreme, who is the head and to who all the others are subject". Becoming like God is not saying we will ever by equal to him, frankly we won't and can't. He, and only He, will forever be worshipped by us.

The Deity of Jesus Christ

Mormons hold firmly to the deity of Christ. For members of the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS), Jesus is not only the Son of God but also God the Son. Evangelical pollster George Barna found in 2001 that while only 33 percent of American Catholics, Lutherans, and Methodists (28 percent of Episcopalians) agreed that Jesus was “without sin”, 70 percent of Mormons believe Jesus was sinless.

The Cross and Christ’s Atonement:

The Cross became popular as a Christian symbol in the Fifth Century A.D. . Members of the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) believe the proper Christian symbol is Christ’s resurrection , not his crucifixion on the Cross. Many Mormon chapels feature paintings of the resurrected Christ or His Second Coming. Furthermore, members of the church believe the major part of Christ’s atonement occurred in the Garden of Gethsemane as Christ took upon him the sins of all mankind.

Definition of “Christian”: .

But Mormons don’t term Catholics and Protestants “non-Christian”. They believe Christ’s atonement applies to all mankind. The dictionary definition of a Christian is “of, pertaining to, believing in, or belonging to a religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ”: All of the above denominations are followers of Christ, and consider him divine, and the Messiah foretold in the Old Testament. They all worship the one and only true God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and address Him in prayer as prescribed in The Lord’s Prayer. It’s important to understand the difference between Reformation and Restoration when we consider who might be authentic Christians. . Early Christians had certain rituals which defined a Christian , which members of the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) continue today. . If members of the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) embrace early Christian theology, they are likely more “Christian” than their detractors.

• The Need for a Restoration of the Christian Church:

The founder of the Baptist Church in America, Roger Williams, just prior to leaving the church he established, said this: "There is no regularly constituted church of Christ on earth, nor any person qualified to administer any church ordinances; nor can there be until new apostles are sent by the Great Head of the Church for whose coming I am seeking.” (Picturesque America, p. 502.) Martin Luther had similar thoughts: "Nor can a Christian believer be forced beyond sacred Scriptures,...unless some new and proved revelation should be added; for we are forbidden by divine law to believe except what is proved either through the divine Scriptures or through Manifest revelation." He also wrote: "I have sought nothing beyond reforming the Church in conformity with the Holy Scriptures. The spiritual powers have been not only corrupted by sin, but absolutely destroyed; so that there is now nothing in them but a depraved reason and a will that is the enemy and opponent of God. I simply say that Christianity has ceased to exist among those who should have preserved it." The Lutheran, Baptist and Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) churches recognize an apostasy from early Christianity. The Lutheran and Baptist churches have attempted reform, but Mormonism (and Roger Williams, and perhaps Martin Luther) require inspired restoration, so as to re-establish an unbroken line of authority and apostolic succession.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .* * *

• Christ-Like Lives:

The 2005 National Study of Youth and Religion published by UNC-Chapel Hill found that Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) youth (ages 13 to 17) were more likely to exhibit these Christian characteristics than Evangelicals (the next most observant group):

1. Attend Religious Services weekly
2. Importance of Religious Faith in shaping daily life – extremely important
3. Believes in life after death
4. Does NOT believe in psychics or fortune-tellers
5. Has taught religious education classes
6. Has fasted or denied something as spiritual discipline
7. Sabbath Observance
8. Shared religious faith with someone not of their faith
9. Family talks about God, scriptures, prayer daily
10. Supportiveness of church for parent in trying to raise teen (very supportive)
11. Church congregation has done an excellent job in helping teens better understand their own sexuality and sexual morality

LDS Evangelical
1. 71% 55%
2. 52 . . 28
3. 76 . .62
4. 100 . 95
5. 42 . . 28
6. 68 . . 22
7. 67 . . 40
8. 72 . . 56
9. 50 . . 19
10 65 . . 26
11 84 . . 35

So what do you think the motivation is for the Evangelical preachers to denigrate the Mormon Church? You would think Evangelical preachers would be emulating Mormon practices (a creed to believe, a place to belong, a calling to live out, and a hope to hold onto) which were noted by Methodist Rev. Kenda Creasy Dean of the Princeton Theological Seminary, as causing Mormon teenagers to “top the charts” in Christian characteristics. It seems obvious pastors shouldn't be denigrating a church based on First Century Christianity, with high efficacy. The only plausible reason to denigrate Mormons is for Evangelical pastors to protect their flock (and their livelihood).

Further Reading: http://jesuschrist.lds.org/SonOfGod/eng/

41. Mike Theemling said the following at 10:22 AM on Oct 8:

Interesting discussion.

I too am interested in an honest, open discussion about the differences between traditional Protestantism (since that is what it is compared to in this thread, but for the sake of this reply I'll use the term 'Christian') and Mormonism without misrepresenting either.

For myself I have done a healthy amount of research in the past about it and have asked dedicated Mormons if this were in fact true.

Rather than give an exhaustive laundry list of every single difference, I will try and explain the major doctrinal differences (If I am incorrect, please correct me for the sake of myself and the readers):

1. Jesus was not always God as Christians understand Him, nor was He God's "only Son"
Mormons believe that Jesus was "not God (or fully God)" in the past but eventually attained that status (or something akin to the nature of God the Father). Additionally, unlike God the Father, Jesus did not always exist. And it's true that Mormon's believe that Lucifer was Jesus' brother (and in essence we all are siblings to Jesus).

It should be noted that the debate over the God-man in Jesus is not new. In the early Church, one big issue was reconciling Jesus' nature. Some thought he was "half God, half man", or "like God, but not as 'full' or 'complete' like the Father" (mainly it was a group called the Arians who held this view). However, Athanasius of Alexandria argued that if Jesus were not truly God in the exact same sense as God the Father was God, then His sacrifice could not have the infinite value needed to atone for the sins of the world (a bit like who is worthy to crown Napoleon but Napoleon himself).

2. Salvation through grace as opposed through works
Mormonism believes that faith is a necessary but not sufficient element to salvation. And that works are necessary to obtain a "better Heaven" (see below).

Thus most Mormons (some disagree) don't believe in what's called "deathbed repentance" as is possible in Christian theology. Their view of what happens after you die is that rather than in a "final state" (e.g. Heaven, Hell, etc) you are in a state where you can shift either towards the light or towards darkness. However, that how one lived would be a strong indicator of which direction they moved in (i.e. those who lived better would be more apt to move towards the light and likewise with evil towards darkness).

3. The 3 heavens
As Jeremy stated, there are three Heavens in Mormon theology, depending upon how you lived. Without going into too much detail on each, in order to get into the "top tier" Heaven you need to be A) A good Mormon, and B) Married (which is why they have a strong push towards marriage as early as possible). Kids may be another prerequisite but I can't remember if it is nor not.

Interestingly enough, most Mormons believe that mainstream Christians will go to the 2nd Heaven.

4. Continued Revelation
Unlike Christianity where they believe that God given "commands" stopped at the last book of the Bible, Mormonism supports the idea that God can still give new doctrinal commands.

One of the most famous cases of this was in 1978 when the Mormon church reversed its stance that Blacks could not hold the priesthood.

These are some of the major differences. There are certainly others, but some of them that many Christians may be unaware of.

42. Nate said the following at 10:35 AM on Oct 8:

Seth (#29) is absolutely right that Satan mixes truth with lies to bolster the lies.

The woman (and the man) did become "like God"; God himself says so in Gen. 3:22.

So, yes, becoming "like God" in the sense of knowing good and evil was a truth that Satan mixed into his lie.

But the illocutionary force of Satan's statement in Gen. 3:5 was to tempt. That's a far cry from what Luke, John, Paul, and Peter are doing. That's why I maintain that the temptation was to godhood.

Notice, too, the phrasing: "like God".

If God is loving, then of course it's a wonderful thing to be "like God"--i.e., to be loving. No one would ever say otherwise.

What Mormon theology teaches, though, is that man is not to become simply "like God"; rather, he is to become a god himself.

So we've still a fundamental difference in our theologies.

That said, Seth, I appreciate your kind and even-handed tone in arguing your point. I'm sorry I put mine so bluntly.

43. Niki said the following at 10:42 AM on Oct 8:

Seth R. #29 -

"This simply proves my point that traditional Christianity operates from the assumption that the power to destroy is the only ultimate power. That creation is nothing worth reverence-ing unless it also comes bundled with an absolute power to unmake and annihilate.

While it stands to reason that God, as sovereign, eternal, and pre-existent, has the ultimate power to destroy everything, I don't believe that this is a fundamental assumption that Christianity operates under. Rather, I would argue that it operates under God being the ultimate power, the only power, only being that can create. And, if He can create, then yes, He could destroy, but you can't have one without the other. And, if God is the ultimate power as the sole being that has the ability to create, then what He has created is worth 'reverencing', or respecting simply because He made it.

And, if God is the only eternal, pre-existent being, who created everything, why WOULDN'T there be a divide between Him and his creation? Is the piece of clay equal to the potter? Does the clay have merit on its own, or does it only become 'special' when the potter molds it into something?

When God created man and woman and placed them in the garden, they had a special relationship with Him, one not tainted by sin, or greed. But it does not stand to reason that at that stage they were 'equal' with God, or gods themselves (re-read Genesis 1-3). And, of course, with the fall, the divide between God and man became extreme, and needed intervention to repair (which comes in Christ, fully man, fully God, making restitution on the cross for our disgrace).

44. Stephanie said the following at 11:40 AM on Oct 8:

Thanks to the people who responded to my comment way back at the top of the comment list. :) Now I get that saying Jesus is the same "specie" as us can be an excuse to think "God was us. So we must be God!"

45. Sara said the following at 11:41 AM on Oct 8:

Oooh, a real live articulate Mormon to ask questions of! Sometimes things in books and on websites are worded so detachedly, and it makes you wonder how a normal person would answer.

Seth,
what keeps you from going from an everything-is-eternal belief to just plain materialism? Why posit a God at all? Also, what is it about the Book of Mormons that makes it seem believable to you? (And no saying, "well, I just have faith" because that's circular: the way people get the idea of having faith is through sacred texts)

46. BDB said the following at 12:34 PM on Oct 8:

Some days I'm glad I never took a Theology class...

47. Jim H. said the following at 1:34 PM on Oct 8:

BDB #31 and #34
I am not sure what your point is and how it relates to this thread.

The issue at hand is the Mormon view of Jesus and the broader question of their view of God in general (for example, the belief that there is no difference between God's substance and that of man and creation). In essence, they are elevating man to divine status since they assert that man's fundamental substance does not differ from God's fundamental substance. That is no mere theological fine point - that is an entirely different view of God than Biblical Christianity. I have quoted a Biblical passage which I believe justifies creation ex nihilo. If God indeed created the universe out of nothing, that removes the necessary ontological link between God and His creation. The Mormons cling to this supposed ontological link so they can elevate man to divine status.

You also hint at a false contradiction betweens Paul's teachings on justification and James' teaching. That has nothing to do with this thread, but I think you bring it up as an example of theological pitfalls. They are actually quite harmononious upon closer analysis. Paul was takling about justification before God (how we are saved) and James was talking about justification before men - how we live out our faith in a practical way to authenticate it before men - so they can see material difference between the way a Christian lives and the way a heathen lives. In other words, James use of justification was meant to show Christians how to be the salt of the world.

I think it is dangerous to hold a low view of doctrine and theology - that is how the church becomes corrupted. There are indeed minor elements of doctrine that have wrongly divided evangelicals, but when it comes to essential truths of the Christian faith, and in particular, the Gospel, who God is and who man is, we must adhere to those essential elements which define evangelical Christianity , even if it results in division.

48. Seth R. said the following at 3:24 PM on Oct 8:

Jim, you can certainly imply creation ex nihilo from Heb 11:3, but the problem is the interpretation of the word "invisible."

Quite a bit of our discovered material universe is "invisible." So this doesn't quite get us there. Neither do words like "created" and "formed" require ex nihilo. You can view both words as describing an organization from pre-existing matter.

Sara, I would agree that Mormonism has some definite materialist themes. But I'm not how that demands Mormonism ultimately conclude in absolute materialism.

I imagine the beginnings of an answer to your question are found in the Book of Mormon - 2 Nephi 2:13

"And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away. "

Without something to bring order to the Mormon cosmos, it must have remained in a state of chaos. But God brings order and creation from this chaotic universe. So I can say that at least for me, and for most practicing Mormons I know, God most certainly is necessary for our present state of things.

49. Seth R. said the following at 4:09 PM on Oct 8:

It's hard to keep up with all the many responses and questions, but I'll try.

Nikki wrote:

"if He can create, then yes, He could destroy, but you can't have one without the other."

This is not a theological assumption that Mormons operate under. We consider God to have created the universe in the same sense that a painter or potter uses pre-existing shapeless and disorganized materials to "create" a thing of beauty.

But the paints, the canvas, the clay, were all there before the creation. There wasn't nothing. And God can no more cause a thing to not exist than the painter can cause the paints and canvas to not exist.

Please note that we Mormons do not consider our eternal existence as reason for boasting. Nor do we consider it reason to think any less of our God. The clay is not equal to the potter, and has no reason to boast against him. This is as true of Mormons as it is of Catholics, or Anglicans, or whoever.

Nate, don't worry about it. I understand your response on the Satan tempting Eve with godhood issue. I don't agree with it, but I also understand that we are not likely to progress much beyond this basic disagreement. I think we have adequately stated our positions.

Common guy asked:

"Is it correct that Mormons believe that God used to be a man on another world and that he became a god through exaltation by following the laws of the god he served on another world? Is there a progression of gods as far back as you can go in time?"

It's impossible to say definitively because Mormon scripture doesn't really say much about it. Joseph Smith's King Follett Sermon is the most commonly cited in support of the idea of God being once "a man." Later LDS authorities expanded on that - but their views have not gained widespread acceptance in the LDS Church, so they should not be relied on too heavily.

As for Joseph's sermon... I've studied this sermon, and I am not convince that it stands for the proposition that God was ever a "sinful man" just like me. He mentions repeatedly that Jesus did all that he did by observing what the Father had done. This seems to imply that God the Father laid down His life and rose again as a resurrected being. To do that, he would have needed to be divine in the first place.

So we simply cannot rule out the possibility that the Mormon God the Father was ALWAYS divine and that there was never a time when He was not.

However, your suggestion that God may once have been similar to me is a currently held belief of some Mormons. I don't think it is a possibility that is ruled out by our scriptures (although some Mormon scholars like Blake Ostler think it is).

Either way, I'm sure the idea that Mormonism even admits the POSSIBILITY of a God that was once a mortal man is upsetting enough. So I won't press this point any further. I just wanted to point out that this is not the only possibility for the believing Mormon. We are operating with a lack of evidence, and cannot say it is definitely "this way" or "that way."

But I would note, that even IF God was ever a "sinful mortal man," that does not make Him a "created being." Certainly we know from Doctrine and Covenants 93:29:

"Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be."

So the most basic components of human identity - this "intelligence" - is eternal and uncreated.

This is why you simply cannot say that the Mormon God was ever absolutely derivative from any other prior cause. All identities in the Mormon cosmos - including the Father's and the Son's - are eternal and uncreated. Again, there is no creation ex nihilo in Mormonism. This also addresses Mike Theemling's assertion that for Mormons there was ever a time when Jesus did not exist. It is simply not true. For us, there is no such thing as a "created being" in the way that most Christians mean it.

Of course, that does not rule out the possibility that God was ever "organized" into a different form than He was previously by an outside force.

But, now we're getting into ground the Bible has already covered. Jesus himself was similarly organized or placed in mortal form, and then moved into resurrected form. So the idea of a God that changes states or forms is not really alien to Christianity at large.

One final point for everyone.

Not all Mormons are really trained in theological discussion and debate. In fact, most aren't. This is true of our missionaries as well. We are not trained to approach our religion from a standpoint of rigorous orthodoxy and theological proofs. We experience scripture as a source of ethics, and a series of divine narratives that we are to re-enact in our own lives. We do not see the scriptures as primarily a collection of organized theological statements.

So, to be frank, theological debate is foreign to many of my people. So they simply don't see the same problems in their religion and its relation to the wider Christian world that you do.

Put simply, most Mormons really do think they are Christians and honestly don't see what the big deal is. They think they are in the same camp as you, because they have never been taught to look at the world as being divided along theological/philosophical lines. For Mormons, "being Christian" is about identity and allegiance, not theology.

So one request. Please don't view your Mormon acquaintances and any young missionaries you encounter as being "sneaky" or "dishonest" or trying to "hide the ball" from you. They just don't see the world the same way you do. They don't categorize the world by disciplined theological propositions. They are most likely sincere, and I hope that if you try to challenge them on these assumptions, you would do so in a gentle manner. They really aren't trying to pull the wool over your eyes.

I've only started to understand how deep the theological divide between Mormons and other Christians is after debating theology with such people for over two years. Most Mormons haven't really done this, and don't understand how really different they are.

50. Nate said the following at 4:42 PM on Oct 8:

Mormons are Christian (#29),

That's great.

Athanasius qualified his position away from your out-of-context quote.

The "gospel" of Thomas is a Gnostic text that was certainly not written before the canonical gospels.

You still need to explain the Mormon aspiration to godhood.

And whether you hold that Jesus was originally the archangel Michael (per Mormon doctrine).

And whether he and Lucifer are indeed spirit brothers, born of Heavenly Mother (also per Mormon doctrine).

So, right, it's great that you can dance around the issue and throw out a heap of peripheral topics, but you can't escape the fact that Mormon doctrine is wildly unbiblical.

51. Common guy said the following at 10:21 PM on Oct 8:

Mormons Are Christian #40 -

A literal reading of the New Testament points to God and Jesus Christ , His Son , being separate , divine beings , united in purpose. .

What about The Old Testament that says that there is only One God:

"You are my witnesses," declares the LORD,
"and my servant whom I have chosen,
so that you may know and believe me
and understand that I am he.
Before me no god was formed,
nor will there be one after me. (Isaiah 43:10)

"This is what the LORD says—
Israel's King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty:
I am the first and I am the last;
apart from me there is no God. (Isaiah 45:5)

Scholars agree that Early Christians believed in an embodied God; it was neo-Platonist influences that later turned Him into a disembodied Spirit.

Psalm 139:7-12 says that God is everywhere. If He Is everywhere, how can he have a body? And Jesus says that God Is Spirit:

"God is spirit, and His worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth." (John 4:24)

52. aquinas said the following at 7:36 AM on Oct 9:

Motte, you might find my review of McDermott's First Things article, as well as my review of "Claiming Christ: A Mormon-Evangelical Debate" co-authored by McDermott to be useful in understanding some of the dynamics in the Mormon-Evangelical dialogue that tend to produce perennial misunderstandings.

53. Jim H. said the following at 9:55 AM on Oct 9:

Seth R.
First of all, I want to greatly commend you on your knowledge and calm, even-handed approach in discussing these issues. You are also very honest in your arguments and I have learned quite a bit from you on Mormonism. I also appreciate your dedication and patience in attempting to answer all of our questions.

Getting back to creation ex nihilo,
I agree that the Hebrews verse may imply creation ex nihilo, but does not necessarily demand it. But the flip side is true as well: even if we assume eternally pre-existent matter was used by God to form the universe, this assumption does not demand an ontological link between God and His creation. God, after all, is Spirit not matter (John 4:24).

54. Seth R. said the following at 1:10 PM on Oct 9:

Thanks Jim.

I would also likewise commend you and the other participants here for keeping the rhetoric in check, and fostering an atmosphere of civil discussion. It doesn't always happen on the internet...

To address your points, I agree with you that positing an eternally existent universe does not require an ontological sameness between God and humanity any more than the eternal nature of the matter composing me and a squirrel makes the two of us ontologically the same. That is conceded. Most of Mormonism's view on the ontology of God come from REVELATIONS from Joseph Smith.

Of course, Joseph used Biblical passages to support his teachings. But that is not the same as saying that the Bible requires them.

However, I would point out that John 4:24 is another one of those passages that can be read different ways. Here's the NIV passage:

"God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."

Note that the verse says that God "is spirit." It does not say God "is A spirit." True, the KJV does say "God is a spirit." But you have to keep in mind that, in the original Greek, the indefinite article "a" does not exist. So English translators felt free to insert it or not as they felt best conveyed the proper meaning.

Now, if you read the verse under the NIV rendering - "God is spirit" you'll note that this reading is not necessarily exclusive. God could very easily be "spirit" just as the scripture says, but also material at the same time. Of He might just be spirit and accord perfectly well with John 4:24. But the verse itself gives no reason to preference one reading over the other.

Mormon scholars would also point you to 1 John 4:8 where it says "God is love."

Yes, God is love. But none here would argue that love is all that God is. LDS typically read John 4:24 in the same way they read 1 John 4:8.

55. Jim H. said the following at 6:02 PM on Oct 9:

Seth R.
Again, you bring up some excellent points. I agree that saying “God is Spirit” is not necessarily an exhaustive characterization of all that God is. And I don’t think I can come up with any other verses besides the Hebrews verse to justify creation ex nihilo. Genesis 1 and other passages do not necessarily demand creation ex nihilo.

Moving on to another point (which is in fact the focus of this thread) and has been addressed by others already is the Mormon view of the nature of Jesus. Mormons believe that pre-incarnate Jesus was the first and highest Spirit Child of Elohim (The Father God). But Jesus was not the only spirit child - we are all spirit children of God and pre-existed our mortal bodies. What this means is that there is no ontological difference between us and Christ and Elohim (as was the topic of our previous debate on this thread). Going further and quoting John Henry Evans from “An American Prophet” p241: “As for the Devil and his fellow spirits, they are brothers to man and also to Jesus and sons and daughters of God just as we are. “

That is quite a dramatic statement to suggest that Jesus is a Spirit Brother to Satan. It follows logically from your ontological connection between God and His creation, but such a statement is blasphemous to evangelical ears.

You of course are well versed on the Christian Trinitarian view. Quote from Westminster Confession:

"In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost"

So the evangelical Christian view is that Jesus is one with and co-eternal with the Father and the Holy Spirit (not a spirit child born into existence). Not only did Jesus say "I and the Father are One", he also invoked the Hebrew name for God for himself when he said "Before Abraham was, I am" in John 8:58. The Jews thought it to be blasphemous for Jesus to be using the holy name of God for himself and therefore tried to stone him. There are many other texts that strongly support a Trinitarian view.

The essence of Mormonism, it seems to me, is to elevate man to god status. In fact David Hunt wrote a book on the subject of Mormonism called "The Godmakers"

Another question - I realize that there are numerous writings from your Prophets and scholars and not everyone may agree with everything that is written. How does the Mormon leadership decide which writings are authoritative?

56. Common guy said the following at 10:09 PM on Oct 9:

Seth R. #54 -

God could very easily be "spirit" just as the scripture says, but also material at the same time.

This seems to go against the law of non contradiction unless one believes in the traditional doctrine of The Trinity. Jesus said that God Is Spirit. As I understand the Mormon view, The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit are three separate gods. So in the Mormon view Jesus could only be saying that one of the three is Spirit. Jesus said that God Is Spirit.

57. Seth R. said the following at 10:18 PM on Oct 10:

57
Anyone who is interested in a bit heavier reading on the subject of Joseph Smith, the Trinity, and how Mormon theology fits with the Social Trinitarian model, should probably grab this article:

David Paulsen and Brett McDonald, “Joseph Smith and the Trinity: An Analysis and Defense of the Social Model of the Godhead,” Faith and Philosophy Vol. 25, No. 1 (January 2008): 47-74.

Unfortunately, the article is not available online. The journal's website can be found here:

http://www.faithandphilosophy.com/

Otherwise, you'll probably have to make a trip to a nearby university library to read it.

The article explains that while Mormon doctrine maintains that Father, Son, and Spirit are all three distinct beings, their connection is more than just "playing for the same team" and that they still remain "One God" in every sense, EXCEPT a strictly numerical sense.

As for whether Jesus and Satan are spirit brothers...

Yes. As are we all according to Mormon doctrine. The Mormon heaven is very much about family. So when those old Mormon ads state "family - isn't it about time?" they really weren't kidding.

However, simply throwing out a slogan like "Jesus and Satan are brothers" is to focus on the sensational aspects of the doctrine. It risks that the sensational is all that people will remember about it, and they won't remember all the other stuff that comes along with the concept. It's kind of like an atheist claiming that Evangelicals believe in "zombie Jesus." It focuses only on the weird or sensational, and neglects the sacred and inspiring parts.

That said, this does not even remotely suggest that Mormons are putting Satan on an equal level with Christ - no more than we would put Cain on an equal level with Abel.

We do not assert that Satan's power is as great as Christ's. Latter-day Saints do not believe that Jesus and Satan are equals. Nothing is as equally evil as Jesus is good nor is Jesus power the opposite of Satan's (Moses 4:3). The Book of Mormon also states that the opposite of Christ and God is nothingness (2 Nephi 2 10-15), not Satan. Satan has completely fallen from whatever grace he possessed. He is not God's equal just because he was/is God's spirit son. Neither am I God's equal just because I am His spirit son.

That said, your concerns that Mormons might not pay enough respect to Christ's divinity are not baseless or without merit. Human folly being what it is, the danger of overly familiarizing the Father and the Son is very real.

Current LDS apostle Elder M. Russell Ballard cautioned Mormons against this very thing:

"We occasionally hear some members refer to Jesus as our Elder Brother, which is a true concept based on our understanding of the premortal life with our Father in Heaven. But like many points of gospel doctrine, that simple truth doesn't go far enough in terms of describing the Savior's role in our present lives and His great position as a member of the Godhead. Thus, some non-LDS Christians are uncomfortable with what they perceive as a secondary role for Christ in our theology. They feel that we view Jesus as a spiritual peer. They believe that we view Christ as an implementor for God, if you will, but that we don't view Him as God to us and to all mankind, which, of course, is counter to biblical testimony about Christ's divinity…

Now we can understand why some Latter-day Saints have tended to focus on Christ's Sonship as opposed to His Godhood. As members of earthly families, we can relate to Him as a child, as a Son, and as a Brother because we know how that feels. We can personalize that relationship because we ourselves are children, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters. For some it may be more difficult to relate to Him as a God. And so in an attempt to draw closer to Christ and to cultivate warm and personal feelings toward Him, some tend to humanize Him, sometimes at the expense of acknowledging His Divinity. So let us be very clear on this point: it is true that Jesus was our Elder Brother in the premortal life, but we believe that in this life it is crucial that we become "born again" as His sons and daughters in the gospel covenant."

M. Russell Ballard, "Building Bridges of Understanding," Ensign (June 1998): 62.

The other question you asked was how to determine what is authoritative in Mormon doctrinal sources and what is not... I'll have to take that one up later.

58. Charles H. said the following at 9:55 PM on Oct 11:

Seth R. - Don't get me wrong; I have no trouble believing your basic assertion that your canvassers are poorly informed. The last one admitted he'd never even read much of the Bible, though it didn't stop him from telling me all about what somebody or other had told him it said - much of which, of course, was nonsense. The fact that he was encouraged to read Mormon books before the Bible underscores my basic point that Mormonism has completely different beliefs about holy books than Christianity does.

Your suggestion that I not consider the Mormon doublespeak to be deceptive, on the grounds that the canvassers consider religion to be "about identity and allegiance, not theology," is a perfect example of what I've objected to. Your canvassers want to debate theology, but when they are ill-informed about it, I am asked to excuse this. On the other hand, if I were to tell them "sorry, my identity and allegiance is with Jesus," I'd get an earful about how they're just the same as Christians, and so forth.

In other words, I am asked to ignore the promotions, make no effort to learn the facts, and buy a product anyway. I wouldn't use that approach for a box of cereal, much less a cult. The bottom line remains: if you believed that non-Mormons are saved, you wouldn't be trying to convert us. The fact that you are trying to convert us shows that you do not believe non-Mormons are saved, and proves again that your beliefs are radically different from Christian beliefs.

59. farmer Tom said the following at 11:42 AM on Oct 13:

58. Charles H,

Well said, Sir.

AMEN

60. Seth R. said the following at 10:14 AM on Oct 15:

Charles, you have mistaken what the purpose and aim of Mormon missionaries is.

The function of a Mormon missionary is not to debate and it has not been for a long time. Their function is to simply testify of the truth and then leave it to the listener whether to accept or not. Missionaries are not supposed to be Bible-bashing with you. Nor are they supposed to waste time talking to people who want a theological argument. They are specifically trained against doing this.

True, some of them give it a shot anyway. But if they do so, they are outside their bounds. So you are simply mistaken if you think that our missionary force is out there to pick a fight, or to debate scripture or theology with you. That's not the point.

Most Mormons prefer to bear pure testimony of truth and leave it there. Mormons like me, who have waded into online debate, are relatively rare. Many of my fellow Mormons consider the debate paradigm unduly contentious and ultimately futile. They would consider me to be wasting time better spent living other aspects of Gospel living.

This doesn't make them stupid, and it doesn't mean there aren't actually some very good arguments for Mormon theology and some serious challenges that it presents to traditional Christian theology. It's just that most of my people aren't that interested in going there and consider their time better spent elsewhere.

This doesn't make them dishonest Charles. It just means that they are operating from different goals and assumptions than you are.

As for the question of how to determine what is authoritative in Mormon doctrine:

Mormon scholar Robert Millet gave a few guidelines that I find generally useful. He lists four sources of Church doctrine that can be considered authoritative:

1. Is it found within the four Standard Works (Book of Mormon, Bible, Pearl of Great Price, Doctrine and Covenants)?

2. Within official declarations or proclamations issued by the Church?

3. Is it taught or discussed in General Conference or other official gatherings by general Church leaders TODAY?

4. Is it found in the general handbooks or approved curriculum of the Church today?

If it meets at least one of these criteria, Millett claims that we can feels secure and appropriate about teaching it.

That's Millett's view. He also provides some statements by LDS Church authorities backing it up. For myself, I'm not entirely sure that any one of those factors in isolation from the others is sufficient. To me, it seems that you need to gain more of a picture of the whole of those sources before you can have much confidence in setting doctrinal boundaries that define the LDS faith. What is in the Standard Works cannot be viewed in isolation from how current and living Church authorities are talking about them. Also what is in the Church manuals and curriculum must be tested against the scripture in the Standard Works. I have seen what I thought were errors or distortions in LDS Church curricula that were corrected by reference to existing scripture.

So I'm not entirely sure that I personally am on board with Millett. But if you stick to his guidelines, I don't think any Mormon can have too much cause for complaint about your questions or comments on modern Mormon doctrine.

One thing to avoid - quoting long dead Church authorities in isolation from what is being said today.

It makes no sense to do this when dealing with a religion that believes in modern and continuing revelation and an expanding canon.

61. Charles H. said the following at 6:59 PM on Oct 17:

Seth R. - To say that the canvassers generally "consider the debate paradigm unduly contentious and ultimately futile" as they openly attempt to convert Christians is simply untrue.

Orthodox Jews simply live out their faith and let people see how they live. You don't. You ask people to convert, and when you do that, you can't seriously take offense that they ask questions.

Contributors

About Us

Relevant Boundless Articles

GOOGLE THIS BLOG

SUBSCRIBE VIA EMAIL

Newer Post | Older Post

The Mormon Jesus
by Motte Brown on 10/06/2008 at 11:02 AM

All pretty crazy stuff if you ask me. And I said as much to a Mormon Missionary once. To which he replied, "People said Jesus was crazy too." Touche, I thought.

According to Mormon doctrine:

Jesus is a God distinct from God the Father
Jesus was once merely a man and not God
Jesus is of the same species as human beings
Jesus's being and acts are limited by coeternal matter and laws