Mormons are Christians

Hi Kasmic, I appreciate the kind words, and I have definitely enjoyed the debate. I actually have a deep appreciation and affection for Mormons, and used to be one myself. The views I have defended in this debate, do not necessarily represent my general attitude towards most Mormons. Now to conclude the debate. Final Rebuttal #1 l Joesph Smith's Christ I think it should just generally outline my argument, so that the voters can understand my approach. 1) Mormons believe vastly different things about Jesus. (His nature, him being a created being, his commands, his Father, him having a brother who is Satan, him appearing to Joesph Smith, etc.) 2) The teachings and accounts presented by Joesph Smith are demonstrably fabricated and false. 3) Mormons are not Christians, as they follow a different Christ made up by Joesph Smith. Simply saying that Mormons follow Christ, does not mean that they follow the same Christ described in the Bible and of history. Being a Christian is a historical distinction, and if a group comes along and reinvents Christ, they have a high burden of proof to demonstrate that they are actually Christians. My opponent attempts to counter this by citing the Apostle Paul. This argument fails for a few reasons. 1) While we cannot verify beyond his testimony that he had a vision of Christ, it is clear that he was a person who had a great awakening. He certainly was a Pharisee and persecutor of the Church, but later came to put his faith in Jesus as the risen Messiah. One can submit that his testimony seems to be fit quite well with his radical and unexpected conversion. 2) Paul's teachings didn't actually contradict Jesus' teachings. Indeed, Jesus taught that we needed to be "born anew" in the Gospel of John, which Paul describes slightly differently. In that this "new life" is gained in Christ himself, being joined to his resurrection life. As Peter even says, "According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,"[1] The being "born again" or "born anew" was through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. Which this is precisely Paul's teaching, that through the resurrection we gain newness of life. 3) Paul was verified an Apostle by the other 12 Apostles, even those who walked with Jesus during his ministry. And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.[2] This text written by Peter, denotes Paul not only being a beloved brother, but that he had been given wisdom from God and that his letters were Scriptures. Joesph Smith does not have this authentication, but rather made up yet another account of him being ordained by Peter, James, and John.[3] Final Rebuttal #2 l Gordon B. Hinkley Quote Let's look at the quote again. "No I don't. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the dispensation of the fullness of times." You said: "Gordon B. Hinkley is stating that he does not believe the long-established or inherited way of thinking or acting in relation to the same Jesus Christ. Not that he believes in a different Christ." This is expressly not the case. Gordon B. Hinkley no where states that he is talking about the same Christ, but rather makes a distinction between the two Christs. He doesn't talk about the "traditional Christ" of whom they [Christians] speak, but the Christ he talks about has been revealed (according to Mormons) in this the dispensation of the fullness of times (the present era). The Jesus Hinkley speaks of then, is the one who was spoken of by Joesph Smith, who allegedly was revealed to him. From the historical evidence, we can see the evolution in his account and can conclude that this is much more likely a spiritual experience that he had later in life, that he reinvented to aid his story about founding a Church. Since the "Christ" of whom the prophets of Mormonism speak cannot be true, then I will submit that they are not Christians. This description would be misleading and would seem to distract from the clear and major differences that they share with historical Christians. Even Paul, warned of such deceptions where certain people he called "super-apostles" would present different gospels and a different Jesus. "For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received,"[4] And here: But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. [5] Within the Christian tradition, yes even the Scripture itself, we see distinctions made upon what a person believes. The groups you described may believe slightly different things regarding secondary issues. However, when it comes to primary issues such as the nature of Jesus, they all agree, even if you add Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox to that list. Mormons believe what has historically been rejected by Christians, almost a type of Arianism where Jesus eventually becomes a God. All the ecumenical councils outright reject and name their doctrines as heresy. It is a different gospel, which they call the "restored gospel," but has no root in the ancient Scriptures. According to Paul, anyone who offers another gospel, even if offered by an "angel" as Mormonism was, then that person is accursed. Conclusion: Mormonism may seem quite similar to historical Christianity to someone unfamiliar with the doctrinal differences. Yet the problem that usually comes up regards semantics. Mormons and Christians use the same terms to describe totally different things, chief among them being the name of Christ. It also is presented primarily through the Book of Mormon, which in a nut shell is 19th Century Protestantism with a works based salvation, and written is bad King James Version English. This book has almost no unique Mormon doctrines, such as the nature of Jesus, the exaltation of man to God, the priesthood, the temple, etc. In a sense, one is initiated on account of the Book of Mormon, then discover through the Doctrine & Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, and other modern revelations that Mormons have some very distinct doctrinal differences from other Christians. Mormons are not Christians because they believe very different things about Christ. 1) A Christ who was created, born a "spirit baby," to an exalted God of flesh and blood. 2) That Christ was a spirit brother to Lucifer, who is Satan. 3) That Christ became a God, though is less than ontologically equal with the Father. 4) That Christ was not born of the Holy Spirit, but was naturally conceived by the Father sleeping with Mary. "When the time came that His first-born, the Saviour, should come into the world and take a tabernacle, the Father came Himself and favoured that spirit with a tabernacle instead of letting any other man do it,"[6] 5) That Christ's atonement for sin was primarily done in the Garden of Gethsemane. 6) That Christ visited a Jewish/American tribe after his resurrection. Etc. Chief among these reasons is the difference in his nature, that he is not of the same substance and ontologically equal to the Father. That he is a created being and brother of Satan. These doctrines are heresies in the Christian Church. Kind Regards, TrueScotsman [1] 1 Peter 1:3b (ESV) [2] 2 Peter 3:15-16 (ESV) [3] http://cesletter.com... [4] 2 Corinthians 11:4 (ESV) [5] Galatians 1:8 (ESV) [6] Journal of Discourses, volume 4, page 2