Is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints 'Christian'.

[McBell]

Take it the way you choose, ok. If you/LDS didn't get it the 1st time there's no sense in trying to explain it. But- and simply, I was proving the LDS assaults on me were wrong and they are misguided in their allegiance and have misplaced trust. I guess one could say the LDS here have listened to, imo, liars and attacked one, me, who only had the truth and their best in mind. But that would be misunderstood as well. Truth is never accepted easily, I believe, by those taught falsehoods as facts.


It wasn't sarcasm. It was truth. But at least you understand what the LDS have been throwing at me. Though I am not so easily offended, angered or deceived as I believe the LDS, at least here, are.


Oh, I get it. It's a mainstay of Mormonism and Mormons in general, I think. Seen it before- didn't like it then but hardened to it now. Thanks for trying the same old tired routine, though. When people can't refute what is said or defend what they believe they always attack. Got'cha. Funny.


I'm sorry Mormonism is not Christian. It wasn't my decision for the LDS church to teach un and anti-Christian beliefs and doctrines. But they did- and we can only inform others of that fact. The LDS church has even asked 'us' (all non-LDS) to expose JS if/when we find proof he wasn't what he claimed to be. We have but no LDS ever thanks us (as the LDS church said they would). One of my firmest beliefs is liars lie, always.
Now, maybe Katzpur/others will stop trashing me for stating the JoDs ARE LDS standard works. This photo/LDS church statement proves the point. THAT is what I meant and said. Twist it as you chose or accept what the LDS church leaders taught their missionaries. I don't care. I am only proving the OP. The reactions I get- with no evidence- only confirm what the OP states. We could have a great discussion if the LDS here would speak the full truth. Then again I do understand how hard indoctrination can be to free one's self from the clutches of.

Oh, Haun's Mill again. Ok. Militarized means weaponized which means 'they possessed guns'. There were Mormon men at Haun's Mill who had guns- all LDS always leave out their role in bad events in their history. Full disclosure is not their mantra. And it is possible that they were those who attacked the Missouri State Militia unprovoked and murdered one and tortured and disfigured another. Is 'that' truth better?
More importantly, though, to me, is wouldn't it be nice if just once the LDS would be completely truthful when they speak of events from their past. But since they won't be honest folks like me are needed to tell the whole truth. Honesty is a mainstay of Christianity but, imo, not in Mormonism.

You have some nerve asking for honesty while flat out lying about Mormon doctrine.

When are you going to reveal the "One True Christian Path"?

By what authority do declare who is and who is not Christian?

When are you going to admit to your hypocrisy?

OASN:
I commend you for not continuing the self appointed martyr nonsense.

 

[silvermoon383]

Militarized means weaponized which means 'they possessed guns'. There were Mormon men at Haun's Mill who had guns

I'm sorry, are you saying this is your source that there was a militarized force? You make up your own definition of a term that does not match any that can be found in the dictionary?

This was the frontier of the country. Everyone had guns, without them you could not feed your family. To claim that frontier settlements were a legitimate target due to them possessing a critical tool (having a rifle in 1830's frontier Missouri had the same urgency as having a telephone today) is beyond belief.

 

[Muffled]

I agree.
The problem is that Sonny is in this thread making the false claims of this and that being Doctrine and then telling the Mormons they are wrong when they tell him they are not doctrine.

Sonny thinks that anything he wants to be Mormon Doctrine is Mormon Doctrine, truth and facts be damned.

Who decides what is Mormon doctrine and is there an official site that has it?

 

[Muffled]

In my opinion, yes, they are Christian.

I believe there is evidence which is stronger than opinion. The evangelistic units are taught to say that Jesus is the Head of the LDS Church. That should be proof enough that it is Christian. Of course anyone can claim Jesus is the head but does it really work that way. For instance the Pope is said to be infallible. Considering the debauchery of some Popes it seems obvious that doesn't always work. And yet I would call the RCC Christian.

 

[Muffled]

This thread is hopelessly off track.
It need to be put to bed.

I believe I disagree. It simply is side tracked for a bit but it will be recovered.

 

[Katzpur]

Who decides what is Mormon doctrine and is there an official site that has it?

The Church leadership (the President of the Church, his two counselors, and the Quorum of the Twelve [Apostles]) decide. Anyone who wants to understand what actually constitutes Mormon doctrine should have no trouble whatsoever in doing so. This article -- “Approaching Mormon Doctrine” provides some good direction in that regard. It is found on the official Church website, “Newsroom.” It is “the official resource for news media, opinion leaders and the public.” One statement in particular from that article specifically answers your question:

“Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “Standard Works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.”

No other writings or statements, regardless of who may have made them, are considered canonical by the Church. Someone can be said to be teaching Mormon doctrine if what he is saying can be backed up by something found in the Standard Works. It's when an individual begins to expand and extrapolate on what is found in the Standard Works that he crosses the line and starts teaching something which is not official doctrine.

 

[Sonny]

I'm sorry, are you saying this is your source that there was a militarized force? You make up your own definition of a term that does not match any that can be found in the dictionary?

This was the frontier of the country. Everyone had guns, without them you could not feed your family. To claim that frontier settlements were a legitimate target due to them possessing a critical tool (having a rifle in 1830's frontier Missouri had the same urgency as having a telephone today) is beyond belief.

No, I am not saying 'that'. In fact, I never even mentioned a "miltarized force". That is a full blown lie. Do you lie like that all of the time? I'd bet you do. But, what I am saying is the Mormons always (always!) leave out the parts of their history that shines the light of reality on them that shows they were the problem. They never mention the fact that armed LDS men were at Haun's Mill. They get more sympathy when they lie, imo, so they do so often and at will. This proves it. What they do say is 'women and children were slaughtered at Haun's Mill'. That is not the truth and my point was just that... the Mormon men had guns. Gee! One would think that I am talking to little kids here sometimes. You all knew exactly what I meant by militarized but instead of admitting or acknowledging it you went that way. Same occurred when I produced proof that the JoDs AND others were LDS standard works. I was accused of being sarcastic instead of LDS here apologizing for trashing me for say were or 'Thanked' for proving it as the LDS church said they would do. I guess we now know what the LDS church's word is, worthless, imo. Some LDS should have thanked me for providing the proof but Nooo. It's all good. I learned long ago how the LDS are. Here is what the Church said....

1. "If we cannot convince you by reason nor by the Word of God, that your religion is wrong, we will not persecute you...we ask you the same generosity...Convince us of our errors of doctrine, if we have any, by reason, logical arguments, or by the Word of God and we will be ever grateful for the information, and you will ever have the pleasing reflections that you have been instruments in the hands of God of redeeming your fellow beings." (The Seer, 15- by Orson Pratt, one of the first 12 LDS apostles).

2. "Mormonism, as it is called, must stand or fall on the story of JS. He was either a prophet of God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned, or he was one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen. THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND (emphasis mine). If JS was a deceiver, who willfully attempted to mislead the people, THEN HE SHOULD BE EXPOSED; HIS CLAIMS SHOULD BE REFUTED, AND HIS DOCTRINES SHOWN TO BE FALSE, for the doctrines of an imposter cannot be made to harmonize in all particulars with divine truth. If his claims and declarations were built upon fraud and deceit there would appear many errors and contradictions, which would be easy to detect (they were and they are- Sonny). The doctrines of false teachers will not stand the test when tried by the accepted standards of measurement, the scriptures" (Doctrines of Salvation (DoS) 1:188- by Joseph Fielding Smith, 10th LDS prophet)

The above (#2) is what I keep saying- Scripture ("the accepted standards of measurement") proves the LDS church is not Christian. I'll post more about this in a bit.

 

[Sonny]

I'm sorry, are you saying this is your source that there was a militarized force? You make up your own definition of a term that does not match any that can be found in the dictionary?

This was the frontier of the country. Everyone had guns, without them you could not feed your family. To claim that frontier settlements were a legitimate target due to them possessing a critical tool (having a rifle in 1830's frontier Missouri had the same urgency as having a telephone today) is beyond belief.

No, I am not saying 'that'. In fact, I never even mentioned a "militarized force". That is a full blown lie. Do you lie like that all of the time? I'd bet you do. But, what I am saying is the Mormons always (always!) leave out the parts of their history that shines the light of reality on them, that shows they were the problem. They never mention the fact that armed LDS men were at Haun's Mill. They get more sympathy from everyone when they lie like that, imo, so they do so often and at will. This proves it. What they do say is 'women and children were slaughtered at Haun's Mill'. That is not the truth and my point was just that... the Mormon men had guns. Gee! One would think that I am talking to little kids here sometimes. You all knew exactly what I meant by militarized but instead of admitting or acknowledging it you went that way. Same occurred when I produced proof that the JoDs AND others were LDS standard works. I was accused of being sarcastic instead of LDS here apologizing for trashing me for say were or 'Thanked' for proving it as the LDS church said they would do. I guess we now know what the LDS church's word is, worthless, imo. Some LDS should have thanked me for providing the proof but Nooo. It's all good. I learned long ago how the LDS are. Here is what the Church said....

1. "If we cannot convince you by reason nor by the Word of God, that your religion is wrong, we will not persecute you...we ask you the same generosity...Convince us of our errors of doctrine, if we have any, by reason, logical arguments, or by the Word of God and we will be ever grateful for the information, and you will ever have the pleasing reflections that you have been instruments in the hands of God of redeeming your fellow beings." (The Seer, 15- by Orson Pratt, one of the first 12 LDS apostles).

2. "Mormonism, as it is called, must stand or fall on the story of JS. He was either a prophet of God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned, or he was one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen. THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND (emphasis mine). If JS was a deceiver, who willfully attempted to mislead the people, THEN HE SHOULD BE EXPOSED; HIS CLAIMS SHOULD BE REFUTED, AND HIS DOCTRINES SHOWN TO BE FALSE, for the doctrines of an imposter cannot be made to harmonize in all particulars with divine truth. If his claims and declarations were built upon fraud and deceit there would appear many errors and contradictions, which would be easy to detect (they were and they are- Sonny). The doctrines of false teachers will not stand the test when tried by the accepted standards of measurement, the scriptures" (Doctrines of Salvation (DoS) 1:188- by Joseph Fielding Smith, 10th LDS prophet)

The above (#2) is what I keep saying- Scripture ("the accepted standards of measurement") proves the LDS church is not Christian. I'll post more about this in a bit.

 

[Sonny]

You have some nerve asking for honesty while flat out lying about Mormon doctrine.

Just bc you won't see the truth doesn't mean I am not stating it. Or, are you saying the LDS church leaders lied when they said the JoDs and 'others' were LDS doctrine? It's hard to tell what people mean when they ignore or refuse to accept clear truths.

When are you going to reveal the "One True Christian Path"?

I did- repeatedly. Here it is for the last time...the Bible.

By what authority do declare who is and who is not Christian?

By more authority than any LDS leader has ever had, Jesus' word, the Bible.

When are you going to admit to your hypocrisy?

When are you going to produce evidence from LDS sources 'given at or about the same time the quotes I present were taught as doctrine'?

OASN:
I commend you for not continuing the self appointed martyr nonsense.

I wish some here (LDS) would stop it. But Im not a martyr. Neither was JS. He was a traitor. He violated the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. He, as Mayor, had a privately owned printing press destroyed. Would you like me to post the incident so you can see his treason? I've done it before so it is handy. Let me know, k.

 

[Sonny]

This is an official Call for Reference (CFR). I want to see where you are getting this claim as well as their criteria for just what constitutes a "militarized man".

Google the 'Battle of Crooked river' and, maybe, Haun's Mill. DO NOT go to any LDS specific or LDS-owned sites. They will give, imo, half truths about what happened and whole lies. I have yet, in over 34 years of studying Mormonism, to see the LDS church be straight forward about its history or early doctrines/beliefs/teachings.

 

[Sonny]

You don't sound sanctimonious or patronizing at all...

You might not know what "sarcasm" is, so just in case, it is using irony to mock or attempt contempt of someone.

In my first sentence, I was being "sarcastic", which was mocking you. See how that works?

Obviously, some LDS members at Haun's Mill were "militarized" (using that word loosely) because they chose to stay and fight against the mob/militia unit that was attacking them.

Perhaps Katzpur didn't mention it because it was so glaringly obvious.

That is just so much BS. I state things as they are, not as some want to twist it. Btw, let's stay on topic- the LDS church is not 'Christian'.
And, Katzpur, like all LDS, didn't mention it bc, imo, it would not garner the same amount of sympathy.

 

[Sonny]

Yes, originally many members accepted many books and regarded them as "standard works", but that term was used as loosely then as you seem to use the word "militarize" now.

No, no, no, no. Geez! "Many members" is another false ploy. It was the LDS church that accepted, taught and published those other standard works' books, not mere members. Did anyone else catch that attempt at misleading the non-LDS here? So stop the outright and intentional deception tactics. For crying out loud, can any LDS ever be totally honest?! Personally speaking, I don't think the LDS know how to be honest about their original doctrines and early history. For one, most have no idea what was said/taught or done. For two, they believe whatever they are told by their leaders is gospel without a single question or doubt.

Only those works that have been brought forth by the President of the Church, accepted by the Quorum of the Twelve and then sustained by the body of the Church are considered the Standard Works of the Church.

Uhhh, no. That is so far from the truth. When JS taught many of his doctrines at first no one voted on it/them. And, God doesn't care what a church or a group of people think about His doctrines. he gives them and let's us do what we may with them. Voting for something from God is denying God His rightful place as the one who gives His truth. Imo, that is as ridiculous as anything has ever been. Plus, when did the LDS leaders and members vote on JS's doctrine that 'God is a man'? Or, that Jesus created 'all' things? Or, Jesus has a dad (who has a dad, who has a dad- ad infinitum, ad nausea)? There are a whole bunch of LDS doctrines/beliefs/teachings the church-body has never voted on.

Bible was the first work accepted as scripture by the organized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

Proof the LDS church is not Christian. Christians do not vote on God's words. It is not our place to decide what we will believe from God and what we will ignore or reject. Oh, and the 1st name (of 5) the LDS church had is in 3 Nephi, I believe- 'The Church of Christ'. Jesus named his church some 2,000 years ago (according to Bom's date). Then, mere men told Jesus what they wanted Jesus' church's name to be- and ended up changing it 4 more times. One name, which they had for one week shy of 4 years, was 'The Church of the Latter-day Saints'. Where is Jesus' name? But that name was changed, too.

I love it when men get caught in their deceit and treachery.

 

[Sonny]

Yes, originally many members accepted many books and regarded them as "standard works", but that term was used as loosely then as you seem to use the word "militarize" now.

No, no, no, no. Geez! "Many members" is another false ploy. It was the LDS church that accepted, taught and published those other standard works' books, not mere members. Did anyone else catch that attempt at misleading the non-LDS here? So stop the outright and intentional deception tactics. For crying out loud, can any LDS ever be totally honest?! Personally speaking, I don't think the LDS know how to be honest about their original doctrines and early history. For one, most have no idea what was said/taught or done. For two, they believe whatever they are told by their leaders is gospel without a single question or doubt.

Only those works that have been brought forth by the President of the Church, accepted by the Quorum of the Twelve and then sustained by the body of the Church are considered the Standard Works of the Church.

Uhhh, no. That is so far from the truth. When JS taught many of his doctrines at first no one voted on it/them. And, God doesn't care what a church or a group of people think about His doctrines. He gives them and let's us do what we may with them. Voting for something from God is denying God His rightful place as the one who gives His truth. Imo, that is as ridiculous as anything has ever been. Plus, when did the LDS leaders and members vote on JS's doctrine that 'God is a man'? Or, that Jesus created 'all' things? Or, Jesus has a dad (who has a dad, who has a dad- ad infinitum, ad nausea)? There are a whole bunch of LDS doctrines/beliefs/teachings the church-body has never voted on.

Bible was the first work accepted as scripture by the organized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

Proof the LDS church is not Christian. Christians do not vote on God's words. It is not our place to decide what we will believe from God and what we will ignore or reject. Oh, and the 1st name (of 5) the LDS church had is in 3 Nephi, I believe- 'The Church of Christ'. Jesus named his church some 2,000 years ago (according to Bom's date). Then, mere men told Jesus what they wanted Jesus' church's name to be- and ended up changing it 4 more times. One name, which they had for one week shy of 4 years, was 'The Church of the Latter-day Saints'. Where is Jesus' name? But that name was changed, too.

I love it when men get caught in their deceit and treachery.

 

[Sonny]

Yes, originally many members accepted many books and regarded them as "standard works", but that term was used as loosely then as you seem to use the word "militarize" now.

No, no, no, no. Geez! "Many members" is another false ploy. It was the LDS church that accepted, taught and published those other standard works' books, not mere members. Did anyone else catch that attempt at misleading the non-LDS here? So stop the outright and intentional deception tactics. For crying out loud, can any LDS ever be totally honest?! Personally speaking, I don't think the LDS know how to be honest about their original doctrines and early history. For one, most have no idea what was said/taught or done. For two, they believe whatever they are told by their leaders is gospel without a single question or doubt.

Only those works that have been brought forth by the President of the Church, accepted by the Quorum of the Twelve and then sustained by the body of the Church are considered the Standard Works of the Church.

Uhhh, no. That is so far from the truth. When JS taught many of his doctrines at first no one voted on it/them. And, God doesn't care what a church or a group of people think about His doctrines. He gives them and let's us do what we may with them. Voting for something from God is denying God His rightful place as the one who gives His truth. Imo, that is as ridiculous as anything has ever been. Plus, when did the LDS leaders and members vote on JS's doctrine that 'God is a man'? Or, that Jesus created 'all' things? Or, Jesus has a dad (who has a dad, who has a dad- ad infinitum, ad nausea)? There are a whole bunch of LDS doctrines/beliefs/teachings the church-body has never voted on.

Bible was the first work accepted as scripture by the organized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

Proof the LDS church is not Christian. Christians do not vote on God's words. It is not our place to decide what we will believe from God and what we will ignore or reject. Oh, and the 1st name (of 5) the LDS church had is in 3 Nephi, I believe- 'The Church of Christ'. Jesus named his church some 2,000 years ago (according to Bom's date). Then, mere men told Jesus what they wanted Jesus' church's name to be- and ended up changing it 4 more times. One name, which they had for one week shy of 4 years, was 'The Church of the Latter-day Saints'. Where is Jesus' name? But that name was changed, too.

I love it when men get caught in their deceit and treachery.

 

[Sonny]

The Holy Bible was the first work accepted as scripture by the organized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

Not the Book of Mormon? Whoa! JS, founder of the Mormon church, taught that a man would get nearer to God by abiding by the BoM than by any other book. So, the BoM should have been the first, and most important, book to the LDS. So much is confusing that comes from the LDS church, to me. D&C 132:8 must be a printing mistake.

 

[Sonny]

Well lets see, there's a specific part of the Constitution that specifically forbids the government from choosing one religion over another, there's the fact that many of the founders were Deist...

Then there's the entire history of totally un-Christian behavior. If the US was supposed to be Christian it's done a **** poor job of it.

Humans always muck things up. Thus, Jesus on the Cross.

 

[Sonny]

I started out reading the thread but quickly lost interest.

1) The thread was never a real demonstration of whether Mormons are Christians. It is a demonstration of characteristics of the psychology that assumes another point of view is invalid.

The O.P. asks a simple question and then morphs quickly into irrelevance and complaints that have nothing to do with belief in Jesus the OP wonders about. It simply devolves into another rant of one Christian against another type of Christianity that becomes irrelevant to the question of the OP.


2) Multiple readers tried to inject rationale and logic and reason into the thread.
For examples :
Early on, Terrywoodenpic said : “However they are also more Christian, than those that deny them.”

Nietzsche pointed out : " No, no. Your personal Christianity is radically different from Mormonism. You do not and cannot speak for all other Christians, so stop pretending like you do” #388

Kirran observed : "...I don't think any Christian has the right to tell someone else they're not Christian when they understand themselves to be so.” #15

The characteristic pattern of rant and complaint by sonny and other anti-christian Christians (Christians who inappropriately criticize other Christians) still continues and multiple readers are still trying to inject reason and logic and relevance into the thread.

Orontes said : “ Your position rests on a category mistake. It is also boorish as your many posts fail to distinguish between what is doctrinal and what is not. “ #423

Metis pointed out regarding simplicity of belief : “It actually is: John 3:16”

Mestemia pointed out : “See, the problem here, the one you seem unable to understand, is that you are showing nothing more than how Mormon beliefs differ from your beliefs.
Of course, you are also flat out lying about them, but that aside, you have not shown how they are wrong. You have merely gone on and on about how their beliefs differ from yours.” #429

The problem with the psychology that disdainS and devalues other points of views other than its own is that it does not respond to rationale and logic and reason. It only sees it's point of view. The thread was never an example of religious phenomenon, it was a psychological discussion demonstrating a psychological phenomenon.



3) The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons) are Christians.

When I was a young child, I was a Methodist and I believed in the existence of a God and I believed in Jesus as my savior and I wanted to do what Jesus wanted me to do.
I was a Christian.

When I was a teenager, friends brought me into Baptist theology I still believed in the existence of a God and I believed in Jesus as my savior and I wanted to do what Jesus wanted me to do.
I was a Christian.
I did not give up being a Christian in becoming a Baptist.

As I became an adult, I came to discover and believe in Restorational Theology and I still believed in the existence of a God and I believe in Jesus as my savior and I want to do what Jesus wants me to do.
I am still a Christian. I did not give up being a Christian in discovering christian history in restorational theology.

The belief in early historical Christian theology simply meant that I have even more reasons to honor Jesus for what he did and is doing. Historical knowledge does not negate belief in Jesus, but instead, it deepens it.

An example of how historical awareness depends appreciation in Jesus can be shown by an accurate discussion of a restoration of early beliefs. Whether this knowledge is restored through historical study or by restorational theology doesn't matter, it is the increase in knowledge that I am speaking to.

Take the single ancient Judeo-Christian doctrine of pre-existence.

Though I have, as long as I can remember, believed Jesus was my savior in some way, I did not always have an understanding nor a deep appreciation of all that Jesus did for us before the world was even created. Discovery of such knowledge does not make one less Christian, but enhances their appreciation of him.

In ancient Judeo-Christianity, Jesus volunteered and was chosen to be the redeemer for mankind. Once I became aware of these historical beliefs of early Christianity, it added new dimensions and depth to my knowledge and beliefs and appreciation and honor for Jesus and what Jesus did for mankind.

Before becoming historically aware of early Christian worldviews, I did not know the role Jesus played in the war in heaven and in overcoming Lucifer and his colleagues. After historical awareness, I am able to be grateful and honor him for what I believe he did in this regards.

With greater historical awareness I became aware of what it meant for him to be chosen as the greatest servant of his Father and to be given authority and to possess the characteristics that allow him to wield authority and judgment righteously.

With greater historical awareness I have come to appreciate his role as “the word” of God and his great cosmic role of morally educating mankind so as to prepare them to ultimately live in a social heaven in harmony and joy forever.

The specific role he plays as a redeemer in the superlative atonement he wrought by his great sacrifice of his time and talents throughout his life which culminated in his giving up of his life for us was always a central belief and focus I possessed. Though it was the great, central accomplishment, it was only one aspect of what Jesus accomplished.

Gaining the historical knowledge of Jesus’ descent into Hades to free the patriarchs and others who had died from hades and bringing them forth into the resurrection with him and this great fulfillment of the hope of the religious through all prior generations was a superlative accomplishment.

The historical concept that Jesus becomes the heir of a glorious kingdom to which all mankind may belong and awareness of characteristics which justify his worthiness to become the rightful heir of such a kingdom bestows it’s own degree of honor upon Jesus in my eyes.

These historical discoveries of restorational theology did not disqualify me from being a Christian. If anything, knowledge of Historical Christianity provides data and logic and rationale behind my beliefs in Jesus and justification for the deep honor and profound love and gratitude I feel forJesus. I am a Christian, through and through. I've always been a Christian. I am also a mormon.

Clear
δρτωτωσεω

Criticizing Christians for speaking out against LDS who want to force their Christianity on real Christians is ... well...so sad. Then, assuring others that the LDS church is a Christian church, with no references, mind you, is almost as sad.
Why don't you simply say 'we LDs are Christians bc we say we are and not bc the facts say we aren't'? It would have made tremendously more sense. But, Alas! Mormonism is not a Christian organization. The LDS church does not believe what Christians believe, they do not teach, practice or preach what the others do. There are few, if any, Christian traits in the LDS church. They certainly act it, talk it but teach anything buut it. In fact, imo, many of the LDS church's teachings/beliefs/doctrines/etc are totally foreign to Christianity and, most of them are, in fact, considered blasphemous by all true Christians. Some of the things, I believe, that are blasphemous beliefs are-
JS is a God
JS is "as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity and calling as God, the Father is in heaven"
The whole world will use the Inspired version of the Bible that JS wrote
God is a man
God is a polygamous in heaven
Jesus is the brother of the Devil
God had sexual relations with his daughter (Mary- incest) to birth Jesus
Mary had TWO husbands
Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden were in America's Missouri, Jackson County. Btw, how did everyone get to the middle east? Ether tells us how they got back- the world's first submarines.
God has a dad. If Jesus has a dad and he has a dad please explain how the major and sacred doctrine of the LDS church can state that Jesus created 'all' things? Since both are very major LDS teachings and both are impossible contradictions, how can both be true? Some LDS? Any LDS?
There really are a lot more differing doctrines (blasphemies) I could post. These should be enough to show that the LDS church is not a Christian church bc Christianity does not teach a single one of these (for those who believe the Mormon church is Christian).

 

[Sonny]

In my opinion, yes, they are Christian.

What makes you think the LDS are Christians? Their soft talk and easy-going demeanor, perhaps? Their 'words' of love for all? The LDS church, at one time and until they were attacked for doing it, used to only help their own people when catastrophes hit an area. I think it was in late 80s or early 90s that the prophet said they would help their own in Mexico who had been hit by an earthquake or hurricane. That sparked extreme outrage. Some LDS even quit the church publicly. Christians help everyone no matter their church affiliation or whether or not they believe in God. No other religious/atheist group does that- until recently if at all still. The Mormon prophet got showing his true colors. But, the outcry made Mormonism 'change' once again. There are 3 constants in Mormonism. One is change.

 

[Sonny]

I agree.
The problem is that Sonny is in this thread making the false claims of this and that being Doctrine and then telling the Mormons they are wrong when they tell him they are not doctrine.

Sonny thinks that anything he wants to be Mormon Doctrine is Mormon Doctrine, truth and facts be damned.

It is so unfortunate to see people tell such absurd falsehoods but there you are. Clearly, attacking me- and thinking I am affected by your words- is where you get your fun. Also unfortunately, I don't care what you think/say bc you never show proof I am mistaken- you/LDS just keep regurgitating that I am. I post what the LDS leaders- your leaders- have stated was their standard works. If you choose to call your leaders 'liars' that is fine with me. On that point, though, we both agree. But, as is usual, I am making inroads. I always do. Evidence cannot be ignored, refuted or dismissed so it is believed. And, I did post proof the LDS sw are more than 4 books- unless you're going to say that the LDS god changes. Are you saying that? When the 'other' sw were being taught, printed, published and preached no one 'then' said a contrary or negative word about them. neither did the LDS god who said he would quickly sweep any LDS leaders off the earth if they 'tried' to teach what he didn't approve of. I believe he must have approved of the JoDs and others or someone would have died then. Right? Unless ur going to say the LDS god is a liar. I wouldn't do that if I were you but go for it. I'll believe you if you did.

See! All I tried to do has almost been done- show that the LDS church is not Christian. Heck, I even showed where the LDS said they wanted nothing to do with Christianity or any other established church. So how can the LDS be Christians when they said that?
I doubt anyone replies to this bc they haven't yet. But people are listening and the truth is coming out. Are you ready for it?

 

[Sonny]

Who decides what is Mormon doctrine and is there an official site that has it?

They make it up as they go along- as times change, old men die off and new ones take their places or as the culture changes or when the 'world' finds out what the LDS church had been teaching.
If god really did speak to JS and tell him His commands, doctrines, etc then there would never be a need to change a single belief bc God knows everything, the end before the beginning, so why would there ever be a change in anything God gave to the LDS? None of us can have it both ways. It is my firm belief that LDS doctrine is driven by public interest in or knowledge of the early LDS doctrines and history. I believe that much is crystal clear- otherwise there would never be any changes...especially when one reads what the LDS church taught about 'truth'. I may post some later. Then, all will ask why a single change occurred.