How do Mormons view other Christians

[Zechariah]

The title of this thread is "how do LDS view other Christians?" I thought that the quotes that I posted helped to give a more complete picture. How LDS view other Christians is connected to how they view other churches.

I don't think that you can separate the two.

Well then, if one cannot separate the two, obviously those who claim it is the LDS Church with its teachings, doctrines, and ordinances, they consider false and un-Christian, and not the people themselves they judge as being un-Christian, are being quite disingenuous. That would also explain why some will not extend us the courtesy of referring to us as Christians (even upon our request) even though we identify ourselves as Christians.

 

[4godslove]

Hi. This was brought up on another board and I would like to ask if Mormons view those outside of the Mormon denomination as "non-Christian believers. Thanks and God bless.

Christian Forums - View Single Post - Poll:Are Mormons and/or JWs Christians

Both LDS and JW theology claim they are the true church. They do not consider non-LDS/non-JW as fellow believers.

JW and LDS theology is errant. Holding these views is contrary to the gospel.

obviously we consider our church to be superior or we would be members of a different church.

to me, for someone to be a Christian, that would mean that they follow Christ.

i know many people of all kinds of denominations who call themselves Christians yet are anything but Christlike in their behavior.

i would have doubts about the Christianity of that person no matter what his or her church-lds or otherwise.

generally i view adherence to other Christian churches other than lds as unfortunate, but that does not mean that i think less of the people because of it.

in fact, there are many that i admire.

on a few occasions, i got to spend some time with dale evans before she died. i think she had discovered the essence of true greatness. one time i told her that my mother really admired her and thought she was great. dale told me that if she was great, it was because of Jesus.

 

[skylark1]

Well then, if one cannot separate the two, obviously those who claim it is the LDS Church with its teachings, doctrines, and ordinances, they consider false and un-Christian, and not the people themselves they judge as being un-Christian, are being quite disingenuous. That would also explain why some will not extend us the courtesy of referring to us as Christians (even upon our request) even though we identify ourselves as Christians.

There is a difference in believing that a church teaches false doctrines, and believing that Christianity died. There is a difference between claiming that all other churches are only so-called Christian churches, and believing that the Christian church exists across denominations.

 

[Zechariah]

There is a difference in believing that a church teaches false doctrines, and believing that Christianity died. There is a difference between claiming that all other churches are only so-called Christian churches, and believing that the Christian church exists across denominations.

What there is a difference in, is between how LDS view other Christians, and how LDS view some of the various doctrines and authority of other churches. Since this thread is asking how we view other Christians, when we say we consider them Christians, we mean just what we say. We do not consider them non-Christians, apostates, or un-Christian...

unless maybe they act that way.

 

[A New Dawn]

What there is a difference in, is between how LDS view other Christians, and how LDS view some of the various doctrines and authority of other churches. Since this thread is asking how we view other Christians, when we say we consider them Christians, we mean just what we say. We do not consider them non-Christians, apostates, or un-Christian...

unless maybe they act that way.

I think that the point is, historically, the LDS church leaders always condemned other Christians. It is only recently, since the LDS church has been trying to fit themselves into mainstream Christianity, that they have changed over to speak about other churches or other churches doctrines instead of the Christians, themselves.

 

[skylark1]

What there is a difference in, is between how LDS view other Christians, and how LDS view some of the various doctrines and authority of other churches. Since this thread is asking how we view other Christians, when we say we consider them Christians, we mean just what we say. We do not consider them non-Christians, apostates, or un-Christian...

I haven't claimed in this thread that LDS do not consider other Christians to be non-Christians. However, just as the quotes that I provided spoke of "so-called Christian churches," I believe that LDS consider others to be "so-called Christians."

Some time ago, I watched part of an LDS video tape that a friend who is LDS had loaned me. Part of this tape was about an early LDS leader who had had a dream in which an orchard was full of dead trees. These dead trees were supposed to represent Christianity (minus the LDS restoration). It was taught that Christianity had died. LDS teach that other church's baptisms are not valid, and therefore "other Christians" have not received a remission of sins, been spiritually reborn, been given the gift of the Holy Ghost, nor have they been promised eternal life. Evidently, "other Christians" are believed to be as dead spiritually as the orchard was in the dream on the video.

The Baptismal Covenant

Those who are baptized enter into a covenant with God to take upon themselves the name of Jesus Christ, keep His commandments, and serve Him to the end (see Mosiah 18:8–10; D&C 20:37). Church members renew this covenant each time they partake of the sacrament (see D&C 20:77, 79).

Those who keep the covenants they made at baptism are blessed by the Lord for their faithfulness. Some of the blessings include the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost, the remission of sins, and the privilege of being spiritually reborn. If they continue faithfully, they are promised eternal life (see 2 Nephi 31:19–20).

LDS Gospel Topics, Baptism​

 

[Zechariah]

I haven't claimed in this thread that LDS do not consider other Christians to be non-Christians. However, just as the quotes that I provided spoke of "so-called Christian churches," I believe that LDS consider others to be "so-called Christians."

Then I will simply add that to the list of erroneous beliefs you have about us.

 

[Moodshadow]

LDS teach that other church's baptisms are not valid, and therefore "other Christians" have not received a remission of sins, been spiritually reborn, been given the gift of the Holy Ghost, nor have they been promised eternal life. Evidently, "other Christians" are believed to be as dead spiritually as the orchard was in the dream on the video.

There's nothing at all new about any of that. Joseph Smith taught it, Brigham Young taught it, and the church still teaches it, but much, much more subtly now. Unlike the fiery accusations and condemnations of JS and BY, everything is tiptoed around now - very politically correct.

 

[A New Dawn]

LDS teach that other church's baptisms are not valid, and therefore "other Christians" have not received a remission of sins, been spiritually reborn, been given the gift of the Holy Ghost, nor have they been promised eternal life. Evidently, "other Christians" are believed to be as dead spiritually as the orchard was in the dream on the video.

There's nothing at all new about any of that. Joseph Smith taught it, Brigham Young taught it, and the church still teaches it, but much, much more subtly now. Unlike the fiery accusations and condemnations of JS and BY, everything is tiptoed around now - very politically correct.

And, it's considered doctrine. It's spelled out in the D&C, section 22.

1 Behold, I say unto you that all old covenants have I caused to be done away in this thing; and this is a new and an everlasting covenant, even that which was from the beginning.
2 Wherefore, although a man should be baptized an hundred times it availeth him nothing, for you cannot enter in at the strait gate by the law of Moses, neither by your dead works.
3 For it is because of your dead works that I have caused this last covenant and this church to be built up unto me, even as in days of old.
4 Wherefore, enter ye in at the gate, as I have commanded, and seek not to counsel your God. Amen.

 

[skylark1]

Then I will simply add that to the list of erroneous beliefs you have about us.

Rather than attempting to question my crediblitly, I think that it would be best to point out what I have said in this thread that is erroneous.

Are you claiming that LDS teach that the baptsims of Christians by those without (LDS) authority are valid?

Or that LDS do not teach that receiving a remission of sins is not connected with baptism?

Or that LDS do not teach that one is spiritually reborn through baptism?

Or that LDS do not teach that the gift of the Holy Ghost is reserved for those who have been baptized by (LDS) authority, and then confirmed by the laying on of hands?

Or that those who have been baptized by (LDS) authority are promised eternal life if they continue faithfully?

If a Christian has not received a remission of sins, has not been spiritually reborn, is not considered to be adopted into God's family, is not given the gift of the Holy Ghost, and is not promised eternal life (if they continue faithfully); if it is taught that they are corrupt and draw near to God with their lips while their hearts are far from Him, that they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof, then it seems appropriate that although they may be called Christians that they are thought of as so-called Christians, or Christians with an asterisk.

 

[4godslove]

I think that the point is, historically, the LDS church leaders always condemned other Christians. It is only recently, since the LDS church has been trying to fit themselves into mainstream Christianity, that they have changed over to speak about other churches or other churches doctrines instead of the Christians, themselves.

why do you persist in this baloney?

produce one verifiable official statement from the first presidency of the church that says that we are trying to fit into mainstream Christianity.

show me one statement by lds leadership anywhere that we are trying to do.

that makes no sense at all.

if that were true then our missionaries would just tell people that if they were in mainstream Christianity, that was good enough.

if that were true, then you wouldn't be here trying to bring us down.

undoubtedly, that is a fabrication by people who are against the church to try to make it look like the church is not true but rather their position is.

 

[A New Dawn]

why do you persist in this baloney?

produce one verifiable official statement from the first presidency of the church that says that we are trying to fit into mainstream Christianity.

show me one statement by lds leadership anywhere that we are trying to do.

that makes no sense at all.

if that were true then our missionaries would just tell people that if they were in mainstream Christianity, that was good enough.

if that were true, then you wouldn't be here trying to bring us down.

undoubtedly, that is a fabrication by people who are against the church to try to make it look like the church is not true but rather their position is.

Which part of it is fabrication? That the early church leaders taught that? The the more recent leaders are trying to squeeze the church into mainstream Christianity? What?

 

[skylark1]

<snip>

produce one verifiable official statement from the first presidency of the church that says that we are trying to fit into mainstream Christianity.

show me one statement by lds leadership anywhere that we are trying to do.

that makes no sense at all.

if that were true then our missionaries would just tell people that if they were in mainstream Christianity, that was good enough.

<snip>

The following isn't a statement by a leader of the LDS Church, but it might be useful in understanding why this is said. It is from a 2001 Newsweek article. The entire article may be read at the link.

For example: with Olympic fever heating up, the church's hierarchy recently advised the media that the term Mormon Church is no longer acceptable. Henceforth, officials declared, short references to the church should read: "The Church of Jesus Christ." In this way the church hopes to emphasize what Mormons share with historic Christianity, not what makes them different.

Internally, this emphasis on Jesus has been even more dramatic. Traditionally, Mormon teaching focused on founder Joseph Smith as God's latter-day prophet whose revelations led to the restoration of the ancient Hebraic priesthood and of the one true church. Today more than one image of Smith is hard to find in the church's magnificent new conference center in Salt Lake City. Instead, the walls are lined with huge murals depicting scenes from the life of Jesus. This change in iconography can also be seen in local chapels, called "wards," where Mormons gather every Sunday for three hours. In 1971, images of Jesus appeared only five times in the church's official monthly publication, the Ensign; in 1999, the Ensign published 119 of them. For nearly a decade, visitors to the Joseph Smith Center in Salt Lake were shown "Legacy," a film about Smith and the grueling Mormon trek to Utah. Today there is a new film, "The Testimonies of One Fold and One Shepherd," a Disneyesque dramatization of the Jesus story based on both the New Testament and the Book of Mormon.

More important, Mormon rhetoric is becoming more overtly evangelical. In the sermons by the church's General Authorities and in the language of their prayers, the stress on grace and forgiveness of sins and on Jesus as atoning savior of the world sounds almost Methodist or even Southern Baptist. Are the Mormons going mainstream? "Not at all," says non-Mormon historian Jan Shipps, who has studied the Saints for 40 years. "After a century of cultivating their separate identity as a religious people, Mormons now want to stress their affinities with traditional Christianity yet highlight their uniqueness." Or as President Hinckley declared to Mike Wallace in a 1996 interview on "60 Minutes," "We are not weird."

A Mormon Moment | Newsweek Religion | Newsweek.com​

 

[skylark1]

Scholar Jan Shipps, who specializes in Mormon history, is respected by both LDS and non-LDS. In her comments about a speech that Mitt Romney gave, she mentioned a major LDS effort to be included in the American religious mainstream.

Still, in the way he talked about religious diversity, the nation's symphony of faiths, the way religious liberty stands at the heart of the American constitutional system, and how religion belongs in the public square, this was a consummate Mormon speech. Moreover, despite its political agenda, it is possible to read what Mr. Romney said as being in harmony with a major effort his church has been making since the 1970s: to be included in the American religious mainstream.

What made Romney's big speech so Mormon | csmonitor.com​

 

[A New Dawn]

The following isn't a statement by a leader of the LDS Church, but it might be useful in understanding why this is said. It is from a 2001 Newsweek article. The entire article may be read at the link.

For example: with Olympic fever heating up, the church's hierarchy recently advised the media that the term Mormon Church is no longer acceptable. Henceforth, officials declared, short references to the church should read: "The Church of Jesus Christ." In this way the church hopes to emphasize what Mormons share with historic Christianity, not what makes them different.

Internally, this emphasis on Jesus has been even more dramatic. Traditionally, Mormon teaching focused on founder Joseph Smith as God's latter-day prophet whose revelations led to the restoration of the ancient Hebraic priesthood and of the one true church. Today more than one image of Smith is hard to find in the church's magnificent new conference center in Salt Lake City. Instead, the walls are lined with huge murals depicting scenes from the life of Jesus. This change in iconography can also be seen in local chapels, called "wards," where Mormons gather every Sunday for three hours. In 1971, images of Jesus appeared only five times in the church's official monthly publication, the Ensign; in 1999, the Ensign published 119 of them. For nearly a decade, visitors to the Joseph Smith Center in Salt Lake were shown "Legacy," a film about Smith and the grueling Mormon trek to Utah. Today there is a new film, "The Testimonies of One Fold and One Shepherd," a Disneyesque dramatization of the Jesus story based on both the New Testament and the Book of Mormon.

More important, Mormon rhetoric is becoming more overtly evangelical. In the sermons by the church's General Authorities and in the language of their prayers, the stress on grace and forgiveness of sins and on Jesus as atoning savior of the world sounds almost Methodist or even Southern Baptist. Are the Mormons going mainstream? "Not at all," says non-Mormon historian Jan Shipps, who has studied the Saints for 40 years. "After a century of cultivating their separate identity as a religious people, Mormons now want to stress their affinities with traditional Christianity yet highlight their uniqueness." Or as President Hinckley declared to Mike Wallace in a 1996 interview on "60 Minutes," "We are not weird."

A Mormon Moment | Newsweek Religion | Newsweek.com​

Indeed. The LDS church starting to use words that never had a place in their history, theologically, even though they have to re-define them in order to use them, shows that they are trying to appear more mainstream. There is a reason the Mormon-Christianity Lexicon thread was started.

 

[4godslove]

get this right.

this idea that detractors of the lds church try to sell that the lds church is to trying to become more like the other christian churches is hogwash.

it is only an attempt to make people view the church in a way that is not accurate.

just because the church wants to do things like have the name of the church portrayed correctly or wants us to treat people in other churches in a Christ-like manner doesn't mean that the church is moving anywhere.

don't forget that we use pretty much the same bible you do.

 

[Moodshadow]

get this right.

this idea that detractors of the lds church try to sell that the lds church is to trying to become more like the other christian churches is hogwash.

it is only an attempt to make people view the church in a way that is not accurate.

just because the church wants to do things like have the name of the church portrayed correctly Was it incorrect before?

It's not the name that has changed, but only the way the name appears, and that indicates that the church's emphasis is on the words JESUS CHRIST - in a much bigger font than the rest of the logo. That emphasis was not there before the logo was officially changed, and it was done in an effort to make the rest of the world take more notice of the emphasized words and less notice of the fact that the LDS church is in fact very different from mainstream Christianity.

don't forget that we use pretty much the same bible you do.

That doesn't mean that everyone sees the same things there.

 

[skylark1]

get this right.

this idea that detractors of the lds church try to sell that the lds church is to trying to become more like the other christian churches is hogwash.

it is only an attempt to make people view the church in a way that is not accurate.

just because the church wants to do things like have the name of the church portrayed correctly or wants us to treat people in other churches in a Christ-like manner doesn't mean that the church is moving anywhere.

don't forget that we use pretty much the same bible you do.

Jan Shipps is not a "detractor," but a historical scholar. She is "generally regarded as the foremost non-Mormon scholar of the Latter Day Saint movement, having given particular attention to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." source

I agree with her that LDS "now want to stress their affinities with traditional Christianity yet highlight their uniqueness," and that the LDS Church mas been making a major effort "since the 1970s: to be included in the American religious mainstream."

 

[Moodshadow]

Jan Shipps is not a "detractor," but a historical scholar. She is "generally regarded as the foremost non-Mormon scholar of the Latter Day Saint movement, having given particular attention to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." source

I agree with her that LDS "now want to stress their affinities with traditional Christianity yet highlight their uniqueness," and that the LDS Church mas been making a major effort "since the 1970s: to be included in the American religious mainstream."

And even the most casual observer would have to agree with her on that.

 

[4godslove]

Jan Shipps is not a "detractor," but a historical scholar. She is "generally regarded as the foremost non-Mormon scholar of the Latter Day Saint movement, having given particular attention to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." source

I agree with her that LDS "now want to stress their affinities with traditional Christianity yet highlight their uniqueness," and that the LDS Church mas been making a major effort "since the 1970s: to be included in the American religious mainstream."

did you read what i said?

read it and get it right.