The Narrow Path Ministries

The Parchment and Pen Blog recently included the following essay in promotion of The Theology Program's upcoming classes on Mormonism.

Is the Mormon Faith a True Representation of Christianity?
~ C Michael Patton ~

Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod

“The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod, together with the vast majority of Christian denominations in the United States, does not regard the Mormon church as a Christian church. That is because the official writings of Mormonism deny fundamental teachings of orthodox Christianity. For example, the Nicene Creed confesses the clear biblical truth that Jesus Christ, the second Person of the Trinity, is “of one substance with the Father.” This central article of the Christian faith is expressly rejected by Mormon teaching — thus undermining the very heart of the scriptural Gospel itself. In a chapter titled “Jesus Christ, the Son of God: Are Mormons Christian?” the president of Brigham Young University (Rex Lee, What Do Mormons Believe? [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1992] summarizes Mormon teaching by stating that the three persons of the Trinity are “not… one being” (21), but are “separate individuals.” In addition, the Father is regarded as having a body “of flesh and bone” (22). Such teaching is contrary to the Holy Scriptures, destructive to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and indicative of the fact that Mormon teaching is not Christian.”

Presbyterian (USA)

Presbyterians in many parts of the United States live in close proximity with Mormon neighbors. Historically, these contacts with one another have often involved mutual difficulties. Today Presbyterians are challenged to apply the learnings we are gaining about interfaith relations to our relationships with Latter-day Saints.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, like the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), declares allegiance to Jesus. Latter-day Saints and Presbyterians share use of the Bible as scripture, and members of both churches use common theological terms. Nevertheless, Mormonism is a new and emerging religious tradition distinct from the historic apostolic tradition of the Christian Church, of which Presbyterians are a part.

Latter-day Saints understand themselves to be separate from the continuous witness to Jesus Christ, from the apostles to the present, affirmed by churches of the “catholic” tradition.

Latter-day Saints and the historic churches view the canon of scriptures and interpret shared scriptures in radically different ways. They use the same words with dissimilar meanings. When the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints speaks of the Trinity, Christ’s death and resurrection, and salvation, the theology and practices related to these set it apart from the Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestant churches.

It is the practice of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to receive on profession of faith those coming directly from a Mormon background and to administer baptism. Presbyterians do not invite officials of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to administer the Lord’s Supper.

Roman Catholicism

Question: Wheter the baptism conferred by the community «The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints», called «Mormons» in the vernacular, is valid.

Response: Negative.

The Supreme Pontiff John Paul II, in the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, approved the present Response, decided in the Sessione Ordinaria of this Congregation, and ordered it published.

Mormons

Yes.

Michael Patton

Since Mormonism has redefined Christianity in such a way that the answer to the question “Who do men say that I am?” is not in accordance with the biblical and historical understanding (e.g. Jesus Christ is the eternal God-man) and since they reject the doctrine of the Trinity as one God who eternally exists in three persons, Mormons cannot be considered Christian without doing violence to the very essence of what it means to be Christian. The Mormon Church follows a different Christ, redefining the designation “Christian” such that the commonality which does exist between Mormonism and Historic Christianity is minimal in comparison to our differences.

Is the Mormon faith a true representation of Christianity? No.

Can individual Mormons be Christian? Only if their belief about who Christ is deviates from official Mormon teachings. In this case, they may be members of the Mormon Church yet hold a traditional view of Christ. Considering the paramount importance of the doctrine of the person of Christ in God’s self-revelation and considering all of the other false teachings of the Mormon Church it is incumbent upon the Mormon to leave the Church in search of a representation of a biblical and historic Church. It is also incumbent upon orthodox Christians to stress the seriousness of this issue, yet with gentleness and respect.

See our new course on Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses, taught by Robert Bowman Jr. here. (New episodes weekly).

I found the following line interesting:

Since Mormonism has redefined Christianity in such a way that the answer to the question “Who do men say that I am?” is not in accordance with the biblical and historical understanding...

The irony is that the correct answer, given by Peter, to this question was: "You are the Christ (Messiah), the Son of the living God." Mormons would probably make the same confession. That they may mean something different from what Peter meant by these words may be the case—though we may never know, in this life, what those words meant to Peter at the time.

.

Karen, why do you think I'm a Mormon hater? I do not believe the LDS church is correct in its most fundamental doctrines, and denies (though you apparently do not) fundamental truths about our God and our Christ, Jesus. The only voice I hear denying that they believe these things seems to be yourself, which leads me to believe you aren't really LDS in your doctrine, and I pray daily that you can see the errors of the church you belong to and find a bible-believing church with whom to find Christian fellowship and sound doctrine. I would hope that you would see enough voices around you (some authoritative LDS teachers and apostles) which consistently (pretty much) accept these non-Christian positions as LDS that you would begin to question whether this organization is as you think it is.

It is true that I do not like the LDS doctrine (as I have come to understand it). But, it is not true that I dislike Mormons. Some of the nicest people I've ever met have been Mormons.

One point I agree with Steve above on, though, is the idea that non-historic views of the Trinity are what cause LDS doctrine to be non-Christian. But, there are plenty other doctrines that are presently taught as authoritative by the church (whether or not believed by the laity) that should be pointed out to folks such as yourself.

I, personally, simply don't understand how someone could belong to an organization that they have admitted believe things so fundamental with which they disagree. The modern LDS has lost so many of its "old-timers," I understand, and has begun to try and re-characterize itself and let folks believe various things and back off of some controversial doctrines in all but their most sacred gatherings.

It's like being a boy scout and saying you don't believe in Merit Badges or uniforms and don't like to go on outings or fellowship with other boys. Why on earth would you be a boy scout, and could you even rightly call yourself one? Finding a troop that felt as you did wouldn't mean the Boy Scouts no longer did those things, and they could not honestly call themselves Boy Scouts, could they? This is how I see you, Karen. I don't mean to belittle your belief, but it seems you would deny the very distinctives that define LDS theology, and yet you feel the need to defend your "flavor" of LDS. How can you call it LDS? And why continue to "belong" to such an organization?

.

Please do keep checking in (and participating). I don't think you'll find a "Trinity Only" sort of thinking around here -- though most of us do believe in varying degrees of assurance in some form of Trinitarianism, I don't see it as a sine qua non of our Christian faith. If you can find fellowship among like-minded folks at a building that has the name LDS on the front, but which doesn't indoctrinate you in LDS theology (though I suspect it likely still does in some subtle way at least), then great for ya and I wish you well there. However, I do think that labels matter, and even if a particular ward doesn't adhere to LDS theology proper, then you must recognize don't you the effect such affiliation must have on your witness for Christ among others who do know (or suspect) some things about LDS theology and, therefore, must assume in some measure that you believe the same thing?

Your in a live (though maybe not "living") church body, though small, and actually know very few other christians except those that hate you..... So you turn on Christian radio. TNP 2pm starts sounding pretty good. Text on Text. It was incredibly reasonable for a long while. But the subtle LDS put downs, and now the Trinitarian Only thing, has got me pretty sad. Thank you for all your help, and your warm welcome in the LDS section of Religions & Philosophies. I'de like to keep checking in from time to time if that's ok. I think I'm getting tired now....

Karen, don't go...

I just "met" you. For about ten years I have wanted to seriously converse with an open LDS who would talk about theology. And you are her.

There are precious few like you and they moved...so for years my thoughts have been my only "conversation." Now because I only recently joined this forum and then so recently packed my books and moved, I am frustrated that I can't "jump in" on the "authority" thread and converse with you at the level I have wanted to.

Seriously, it seems like two years ago I emailed Steve after one of TNP programs and asked to be connected to you but he must not have seen my email or maybe he didn't have a chance to do that. Anyway, I am glad to "know" you now and like you, I grow weary of "put downs." Perhaps through TNP forum, you may meet some who bypass and overthrow

world bigotry

.

...the LDS as a structure, is looking nothing like its claim as the restored true church on the earth today, nor the sincere hope and intent of the original group of the early days that so many LDS are still up for deffending. I'm of that kind. What the self appointed old guys in SLC are doing, while its smaller "wards" (the LDS local lay body, who also gathers its SLC Tithing), is suffering from a disobedient, sloven, and disinterested membership and a self "called" leadership now also. Leave? Did Paul cry to all the churches "leave at the slightest offense"? no.

I see value in suffering with those in spiritual poverty, but may I ask what you are seeking to accomplish by remaining with those who are "disobedient, sloven, and disinterested..." If the ECA and/or forum putdowns were eliminated, would it be easier to move your stand to a more closely aligned Biblical Christianity? Not saying that your every theological concept must line up with every single word of creed because I believe that, for example, the disciples grew in their understanding of who Jesus Christ really was. It didn't come to them and THEN, they did something for God. No, they walked with Him and He led them as you stated before, "text upon text" or precept upon precept.

I see you as already walking with Him and just like others--me included--He is leading us all into more of His truth.

Karen, The whole Church needs to hear your message as one called unity. The first day I entered this forum, I read what sounded like a "family meeting" about rudeness and judgement. I was so sad--first impressions--to see those struggling with such basic things as respect, compassion, kindness, gentleness...familiar ring here? Yes, the fruits of the Spirit.........are perhaps harder to grasp than the Trinity concept! I was doubly saddened to see that one was from my childhood family's religion: SDA. It was an unwelcome reminder that prideful conversation often hinders the advancement of theological understanding----and it always stops unity. As if that isn't enough, there is the hierarchy of organizational bigotry, just as you have pointed out.

I left the SDA religion (and Christianity) at age 18 after living, for lack of specifics, a "hard life" of theological and spiritual damnation. Twenty six years later....it took me 26 years...26 long years of looking for God in all the wrong places...to find my way back to Jesus Christ--- because I thought I had known Him and "he wasn't God" in my estimation...because I was so discouraged by Christians who told me I was going to helll. After 26 years I discovered that Jesus is God but the view I was taught was skewed and spoiled with not only the issue of Biblical foundation but moreover, damning attitudes. Therefore, when I committed myself to Jesus, my most precious portion of scripture has always been Jesus' prayer in John 17 in which He prays that we, His whom the Father gave to Him, would live in unity as He and the Father are One so that the world will know that the Father sent the Son. Would the world know this by visiting this forum? I do hear the love of Jesus in darinhouston's last post, do you? Recently when you called the program and Steve responded to your concern about people condemning you, I felt sad to hear him say something like, "some people do..." Those words sounded so final and I felt you might feel them like a hammer (the show was almost over too.) (I trust Steve didn't mean it that way. In fact, I remember another day along time ago when you said something on the show and Steve said something like, "you are not far from the kingdom." I understood this to mean what I believe he meant, that like Jesus, Steve recognized your heart seeking Truth. )

I pray that my personal biological SDA family members and our collective spiritual multi-denominational family members heed your message. I would that we could discuss and perhaps even disagree on theology yet, remain in unity.

For those who read this and respond with something like, "unity only in Jesus Christ" not unity with unbelievers or non Christians. Yes, this concept is true; we must only be unified in Jesus and we should not be in unity with non-believers or non-Christians. However, we must speak to the unbeliever and non Christian in love. My experience as one coming from a "fringe" denomination (which in fact, behaved like a fear and guilt based cult, literally scaring me into nightmares and convincing me that God didn't want me in heaven) taught me the hard way a most precious Christian precept. That being that we can learn all the theological knowledge in the Bible and lacking love, have nothing. Absolutely, Karen, I agree with you that we Bible believing Christians need to speak to LDS and about LDS in a merciful and loving manner, even to the point of refraining from using the word "Mormon" if that so hurts. I do not remember why but my son has told me that it is a "bad" name for LDS. I would have never known unless he told me but having been told, it seems simple enough to refer to you as LDS--or to use the label you feel respects you.

I am hoping to read more of your posts soon, ever seeking to understand you with honoring Jesus' prayer for unity.

.

I will resist the temptation to debate the Eliza Snow situation out of respect for your wishes not to present facts that disagree with your positions.

However, I can affirm similar situations as you in my own walk at times. I have had periods where my teachers continually challenged and convicted me beyond my own walk, but I have had other times where I was just frustrated every week by what you term "slop." Just banal examples and not even "milk" much less "meat."

As to this comment:

But I'm LDS none the less

This is what intrigues me about you Karen -- you seem to not agree with SLC/LDS on their distinctive doctrines and yet you continue to identify with LDS. Help us understand what you mean by this -- what is it that you believe makes you LDS? Simply the culture in which you live (family ties, etc.)? or through your upbringing? or something else?

For me, it's a bit opposite, it seems -- I attend a Baptist church, and while I don't agree with "everything" they teach, I agree with most of the doctrines which would distinguish them from other denominations, and yet I don't identify myself as a "Baptist" -- I simply attend a Baptist fellowship. But for the relationships and ministry opportunities I find there, I could just as easily find a different denomination that either believed as I do (roughly speaking) or at least had liberty to allow me to hold different beliefs.

Just out of curiosity, Karen, are you with the larger Brighamite group? Or the smaller Josephite group?