[...] of Mormon friends and learned a great deal from the LDS church. In fact, we’ve taken flack for urging evangelicals to emulate Mormons in your approach to missions, service, and church growth. We have long stood on [...]

[...] http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2012/08/16/6-reasons-why-mormons-are-beating-evangelicals-in... [...]

[...] French asks why are the Mormons growing at a faster rate than evangelical churches. [Translate] This entry was written by Steve Addison, posted on at [...]

Thank you, Rick. Amen.

From an anthropological standpoint, *all* religions have "wacky" doctrines to someone who's an outsider.

It's a sign of maturity and experience not to treat one's own situation as the norm and everyone else as some sort of aberration.

I really like your ideas, Tim. I wish there was some way that the Mormons could shed the wacky doctrines. The evangelical church is failing because of its heirarchy. We have much to learn from the Mormons.

Just make it up as you go along.

Is it possible that the difference between the commitment is a result of the difference of the beliefs?

As a follow-up, here is one example that just cropped up of an "anti-Mormon" group working and trying to disrupt LDS sacred ceremonies in Utah:

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=22139938&nid=960&title=agreement-reached-over-free-speech-zones-near-temple&s_cid=featured-2

[...] a few posts making the rounds about Mormon growth being faster than Evangelicals. It’s not–not [...]

The ex-Mormons can leave the church, but can't leave it alone.

Good Morning, Slindile,

It appears that you have deleted your comment or else I have been unsuccessful in locating it. But I wanted to briefly respond, nonetheless.

I cannot deny that the words and tone of your post are bait for my sinful flesh (2 Corinthians 2:11, Ephesians 6:11). But I praise the Lord for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, who takes those thoughts captive and makes them obedient to Christ (1 Corinthians 6:19, 2 Corinthians 10:3-5, Romans 8:5-6).

"When we are insulted, we respond with a blessing..." (1 Corinthians 4:12)

The Lord stirred up love and compassion in my heart in response to your words and moved me to pray for you. And I will continue to do so, in His power.

I stand amazed and thankful yet again at His indescribable gifts (2 Corinthians 9:15).

Hello Susan,

I took the time to read several of your posts. Faith and love of God come out with great vitality in your comments. I certainly respect that a lot. I also really appreciate your comment regard reading the LDS Gospel Principals Manual, a very good source for actual LDS beliefs.
I don't know, but you may be almost completely motivated by spiritual thinking. I am motivated by this too, but also strongly by political thinking. I guess my view is that Evangelicals and Mormons can work together to do a lot of good for the country. In that sense, I hope everyone can get behind the Romney/Ryan ticket, because when it comes to faith I'm pretty suspicious of the depth of Obama's.

Hi Bradley,

As an Evangelical, I don't see moralizing society as my purpose in life, nor as something I am even capable of doing. Not to say that we shouldn't support legislation that upholds biblical standards and oppose those that don't. But I cannot cause an unregenerate heart to love the Lord or His ways.

I remain on this earth as an ambassador of Christ...

"Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." (2 Corinthians 5:17-21)

Once an individual has been reconciled to God through faith in this gospel and "made perfect forever" in His sight; then, through the power of the Holy Spirit that comes to live within them, He will begin to make them holy. (Hebews 10:14)

In regards to issues between Evangelicals and those from the LDS church, I will refer to my other posts to avoid being redundant.

You seem to refer to "Moralistic Religion" pejoratively, as if it were bad. Well, I thought that was the point of religion, to moralize? If not, why bother? But your #1 is the only counter-argument to the article that seems fresh to me. All the other criticisms being made, such as by David M above, and Tom Jones below, seem like just the same old Mormon-bashing & whining about what evangelicals disagree with Mormons about -- after trying to prove them wrong doctrinally, if that's not enough, then just call it a "fear-based religion". But that, I think, completely misses the point of David French's article.
Well, I am Mormon myself, and while on one hand French's article is complementary to LDS faith, I don't think that's the point. I believe the point he's making is that effective religion -needs- to be "Moralistic". If "faithful" US citizens can't raise their level of commitment to their beliefs and practice of it, the US is in real jeopardy within the next 20 odd years of devolving completely into something were family & traditional values have been just forgotten. NY Times reported a few months ago that 2011 was the first year more US child births occurred outside marriage than within!
My extended family has always been split between Evangelicals and Mormons. It hasn't always been easy. While everyone always had love, oddly respect was not always shown, for beliefs anyway. But that's gotten better, I think in the last 10 years, my Evangelical Aunts and Uncles & Mormon parents have all learned to just accept. And we all encourage faith & really pray together at occasionally big family gatherings. Why can't that become the general model?

Bradley,

It's comforting to hear that my comments have come through to you in the spirit in which they were writen. Thank you for taking the time to read through some of them before responding.

I defininitely agree that people from all faiths can link arms for causes in the secular/political realm. Unfortunately, there are many out there who believe this requires watering down what we believe spiritually...as though it would be unloving to be honest about the differences. Religious freedom doesn't require believing all religions are true...just that they all have the right to exist.

I'm not entirely motivated by spirtual thinking. I believe that God created secular government and that it is important to understand what is going on and be involved at some level (obviously, the degree of involvement is different for each of us). Yet, I will say that I do lean toward putting my greatest efforts into the spirtual realm and allow my husband to be the "political activist" for the family. :)

I also believe that as the evidence of our depravity increases so does the fruitfulness of the gospel message. When people "behave" out of conformity to a set of rules/laws, they tend to view themselves as pretty decent people and don't typically feel any need for a Savior to absorb the wrath of God for their sins. It was typcially those who were openly wallowing in filth and understood their wretched state before a holy God who were most open to Christ's call.

"...Jesus said to them...'Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.'" (Mark 2:17)

So yes, the state of our country grieves me, but it doesn't cause me to wring my hands and cry out that we're "going to hell in a handbasket" (I'm not implying that you are saying that at all...it's just a sentiment I hear quite often). I believe that the light of the gospel shines the brightest in the darkest places. And it will prevail.

"The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it." (John 1:5)

Thanks for your response. :)

With all due respect, Darren, I believe that a great majority of people outside of Evangelical Christianity wouldn't take most of my recommended resources seriously.

My husband has a graduate degree in fisheries and aquatic biology and he has looked into their resources in great detail and feels very confident in them (takes them seriously). I wouldn't say that we agree with every one of their positions, but I have no qualms about recommending their resources as useful and reliable.

I stand by my list.

Susan -

You might want to re-check your list.

I don't know of a single person outside of Evangelical Christianity who even takes "Answers in Genesis" seriously, let alone would consider them as a source for anything.

Eric,

I asked my Pastor for some suggestions on resources in understanding how the canon was established and why it is now closed. Here are a few of his recommendations:

“Understanding Scripture: An Overview of the Bible’s Origin, Reliability, and Meaning” by Wayne Grudem, C. John Collins, and Thomas R. Schreiner (specifically, he recommended the essay on the canon from this book)

“Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine” by Wayne Grudem (specifically, the chapters on the canon)

“Why 66” a DVD produced by the Answers in Genesis ministry (you can find this on their website)

“The Canon of Scripture” by F.F. Bruce (this is a more scholarly book, along the lines of a seminary textbook)

In my response to SCNation regarding the Bible, I recommended a sermon series by Pastor Kevin DeYoung on the Doctrine of Scripture. He speaks to your specific questions in a couple of those messages. You can find the link to that series in that post.

Lastly, although I’m going to assume that your invitation to meet if I’m ever in your area was coming from entirely pure motives, I’m a married woman and that invitation concerned both my husband and me a bit. I just wanted to caution you to be wise in your interactions online with members of the opposite sex. Having said that, if my husband and I are ever in your area, WE would be happy to meet with you to discuss these things more thoroughly. :)

Great...we're on the same page then. Ya just never know with this internet stuff.

I wish you both well. I've enjoyed the discussion. Take care.

Great article. There is much to be learned from the Mormon Church. I do wonder if those who so adamantly oppose the Mormons have actually attended their services or met with their missionaries not to argue with them but to see for themselves what it is that they actually teach and believe. I've often wondered if the beliefs of those who strongly oppose the Mormon faith are the product of research and study based upon literature written by disgruntled ex-members like those in this thread. I have found that most Evangelical Christians who like myself, take time to understand Mormon beliefs, see the good in their faith tradition and the good in their beliefs, though they may not believe the same doctrine. This type of honest understanding doesn't threaten one's beliefes. It can strengthen them infact. And it will also lead to a much more Christ-like dialogue where communities can come together to foster growth of Christian ideals, and collectively push for positive change.

Susan,

I'm a (happily!) married man as well. And I wasn't trying to recruit you for anything. :)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0013705/

When traveling, you AND your husband are both very welcome.

Susan, I wish you the same and will of course do the same.

Eric,

Thank you for your gracious response. I wish you well & will keep you in my prayers.

Tracey,

Hopefully, if you have read through my comments throughly then you are not describing me in this post.

As I've said, what we believe about Jesus (Matthew 24:24, Mark 13:22) and the gospel (Galatians 1:6-9, 2 Corinthians 11:3-4, Galatians 2:14, 1 Peter 4:17, 1 John 4:1,Jude 1:3) is of eternal significance and that is where my passionate concern for the members of the LDS church lie (along with any other religion or those even within my own circles who are beginning to distort these things). Loving my neighbor would include speaking the truth and trying desperately to protect them from eternal condemnation (1 Corinthians 13:6-7).

Many people live generous, moral lives...even atheists. But that isn't the point. In comparison to God's consuming fire of righteousness (Hebrews 12:29), those things are like filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6). We must be cleansed of our sins thoroughly by the blood of Christ through sincere repentance and child-like dependance and faith in His all-sufficient, once for all sacrifice for our sins and be clothed in His righteousness...which is the only righteousness that will survive in His presence. This is the moment of rebirth (John 3:3); when we are adopted into God's family and enter into eternal safety in His hands(John 10:28). This is the moment of our exaltation (Ephesians 2:1-10).

Those who have truly experienced this supernatural transformation will then proceed to live genuinely transformed lives, in ever increasing measure (2 Corinthians 3:18). So you are right to point out that anger and hatred are in direct opposition to those who profess faith in Christ. But good-looking lives are not necessarily proof of a Christ follower either (2 Corinthians 11:13-15).

So, I will continue to faithfully follow the Words of my Lord and Savior by speaking the truth in love to my neighbor, as I would expect the same of them toward me.

Love thy neighbor as thyself.

Thank you Susan for clearing up the misconception about Jesus keeping His body. Honestly, I have usually understood (because of the insistence on the Trinity and "God is a Spirit") that doctrine to be taught differently in your circle.

I know you hate the "I'm okay you're okay" speech, but really we're getting closer and closer, except for baptism for the dead, priesthood authority, and the continuing revelation thing.

I absolutely understand the spirit in which you say all of your posts. Don't event worry about it. If you're ever in PA stop by for an in-person chat.

I posted my first comment on the 22nd when there had been 415 people post their comments. Now there has been 680 and I'm baffled and disappointed in the back and forth criticism, accusations, name-calling, angry postings I'm reading. I said, "Bravo" to the author, feeling like there was someone taking an honest look at ALL Evangelical churches (including the LDS church) and looking for both common ground and ground with which we can learn from each other. It seems that because many Mormons, like me, found value in this article the rest of the denominations choosing to be heard became all the more angry! THAT is what I don't understand. Didn't the Savior teach that "Only by pride cometh contention" in Proverbs in the Old Testament and "He that hath the Spirit of contention is not of me but is of the devil who is the father of contention" in 3rd Nephi 11:29 in the Book of Mormon. Further, doesn't the New Testament teach again and again that 'by their fruits ye shall know them' and that the 'Holy Ghost is the testator of truth'? Yet, non-Mormons are so angry that they preach against and indoctrinate their members to hate and to rise up against the Mormons. On local billboards throughout the U.S. are slogans against the Mormons. In newspapers, on Broadway and everywhere are campaigns to slander, vilify and separate Mormons as a cult, as worshipers of Joseph Smith etc. Non-Mormons picket our Temples and even enter the Temple as imposters to try to get some 'dirt' on the Mormons. Why is that? IF Mormonism is a lie, is a deception, is not the Church of God, why don't you just write us off as poor simpletons who live their lives doing good and who can't possible matter in the long haul anyway? Why not love us for the good we do, the service we lend, the good families we try to raise, and the morally clean lives we try to live? Why the Hate? Where does hatred come from...God? NO! Every good tree bringeth forth good fruit but an evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. Arguing NEVER converts anyone for God's spirit will not abide in contention, back-biting, a war of words, evil speaking etc. To all the non-Mormons, IF all we ever do is love you, do service for you, give you good neighbors, send out the missionaries to teach 'the world' about the Lord, Jesus Christ; read the Bible AND Book of Mormon ETC., which is a 2nd witness of Jesus Christ, provide a disaster plan for EVERY community where WHETHER you are LDS or NOT you can obtain whatever you need in times of hardship; help my community and your community with canneries, thrift stores, storehouses of food, job resources, and others who don't just talk the talk but walk the walk...why don't you embrace us! There are some in EVERY religion who do things bad, wrong, unwise etc., but most Mormons are just trying to follow the Savior and at the end of this life, if the ONLY thing I did was sacrifice for my friends, neighbors, family, community, for those less fortunate, for those who need and IF all I did was raise an honest, morally clean, loving family who help others and worship the Lord, Jesus Christ will I be cast out? NO and neither will YOU! Let's let God be the judge and teach our children HARMONY, GOOD WORKS/SERVICE, FAITH, CHARITY, and LOVE. IF you agree, write the last of YOUR comment as 'LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF'.

Susan -

Thank you.

The kind of behavior you are describing is not the type of behavior of an authentically converted Believer in Jesus Christ. I've come across many of the same type of people, both inside Christian congregations and outside.

I cannot cause spiritual life to be created in anyone...that is solely the role of the Holy Spirit. So no amount of persuasive language or debate will succeed. What I can do is set forth the Truth from the Bible plainly, hopefully in a spirit of love, and pray that the Lord will raise their hearts to life.

What you have experienced is grievous and sinful. I have experienced similar attitudes from individuals, even within my own family. It's painful but will continue to be the reality in the broken world in which we live.

But I do want to say, I believe that some authentically converted Christians are very confused about how to respond to people in other religions...especially those who they believe have distorted the pure gospel. Unfortunately, this sometimes leads to fear and sinful words/actions when they come across these people.

There are sincere, biblically-faithful Christians who believe that it would be disobedient to allow an LDS missionary into their house or even speak to them (2 John 1:9-11). What I try to explain to these people is that it isn't sinful to have conversations with people of other religions, or for those conversations even to take place within their home. What is sinful is to promote their ministry in any way. In the biblical reference above, taking them into their home would imply giving them lodging and supporting their ministry/message.

So yes, I agree that we need to rebuke those within our congregations (or anyone, for that matter) who are mistreating people of other religions in ANY way. But you also need to understand that unconverted hearts will not respond to those types of rebukes.

I make no bones about what kind of person I am.

For all intents and purposes, I'm *already* a marked man; I've already had threats against me simply for being Mormon, and I've also had anti-Mormon ministers coming after me.

That's on top of 12+ years of being involved in theological gutter brawls; all I have to do is self-identify as Mormon and I have people coming out of the wood work. I've dealt with 10 - 1 odds in the past (and worse), with me being the one.

If it's going to stop, then it's going to take "orthodox Christians" witnessing to their fellows about what's going on.

Like I said - it's bad where I live and some of the other places I've been to.

Last, but definitely not least...

Why does Christ get a body of flesh and bone but not God the Father?

Your phrasing of this question is interesting to me – why does Christ “get” a body but not God the Father. It seems like you are implying that God the Father is somehow lacking if He doesn’t have a body of flesh and bones. Each member of the trinity plays a unique role, both in the temporal and in the eternal. Christ, though He was “in the form of God” from eternity past, “did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross” (Philippians 2:6-8). That was His unique role; to take on human form in order to live a sinless human life and offer that life as a ransom for His chosen ones; and also to raise again with an eternal body – in order to show that He had conquered the enemy and that His sacrifice was fully acceptable before the Father He remains in a physical body in order to physically dwell with His physical people for all eternity (Revelation 21:3). There is nothing in the Bible to suggest that somehow the Father is inferior to the Son because He is spirit (John 4:24).

The nature of God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) is yet another one of those mysterious truths that we must accept because the Bible teaches it and not because we can make perfect sense of it. They are three separate personages and yet in some incomprehensible way they are one God (Philippians 2:6, John 10:30, 1 Corinthians 3:16). When evangelicals use the term “God”, they are including all three in that title.

My Pastor’s response: “The Bible doesn’t give us a complete answer, but as best we can discern, it has always been God’s plan for a human to rule the world under God’s authority, exercising dominion over creation in God’s stead. This was Adam’s original commission in Eden (Genesis 1:26-28, Psalm 8:1-9). This human ruler bringing the earth into dominion would somehow bring glory to the Father. Adam obviously failed miserably, as do all Adam’s descendents after him (Romans 5:12-21). Jesus, the second Adam (1 Corinthians 15:47, Romans 5:12-19), accomplishes what Adam did not do. Through His perfect life, death, and resurrection, He is endowed with “all authority” over creation (Matthew 28:19-20). He becomes the God-human who rules the world in God’s stead (1 Corinthians 15:24). In His glorified body He will rule the New Heavens and New Earth forever, fulfilling what Adam failed to do. In this way, a human rules creation for the glory of God but since this human is also God, God receives all the glory.”

Amen :)

Will all humans be resurrected?

Evangelicals believe in a bodily resurrection for all people (Revelation 20:4-5). God created us as physical beings and aside from our time after our death while we are awaiting His second coming (during which, I believe, we will be residing in heaven or hell as spirits) we will live eternally, on the New Earth or in Eternal Darkness in a physical body.

Again, why He chose to give us eternal bodies is not completely clear. But we can know with certainty – because we know His character – that this will accomplish the greatest glory for Him and the greatest pleasure for His chosen ones.

I think perhaps my final post to answer your questions was too long (still awaiting moderation)...so I'm going to put them in a few shorter posts...

Does Christ still have his resurrected body of flesh and bones?

There is nothing is the Bible to indicate that Christ cast off his body of flesh and bone when He ascended to heaven forty days after His resurrection. To the contrary, the Bible teaches that we will have resurrected bodies “like him” (1 John 3:2) and that His bodily resurrection was the evidence – the “first fruits” – assuring us that we also will receive eternal, indestructible bodies (1 Corinthians 15:20, 23, 49).

My Pastor’s response: “Absolutely; it’s essential to orthodox Christianity (Acts 1:11, Matthew 25:31, 1 John 3:2, Revelation 19:11).”

Hi Eric,

Thank you for your note.

I've posted my final response to SCNation (awaiting moderation?) and touch on this in that response, but I do want to say that evangelicals most definitely believe that Jesus Christ still has His resurrected body of flesh and bones and will so for all eternity. I'm not sure where that misconception came from, but it's false.

As far as differences in belief about the canon...that's definitely not my area of expertise. I am not familiar with other churches (aside from the Catholic church) that accept the Apocrypha but I most definitely could be wrong about that. I've read a great deal in the past about the history of the canon and the defense of the books included and I feel confident that the Bible I hold in my hands is complete and trustworthy, but I am not in a position at this time to provide an adequate response to that question. Anyone else...have at it! :)

Authentically Born Again Believers are all in different places on their journey with Christ and in their understanding of His Word. I understand things more clearly today than a did 3, 5, 10 years ago and that growth will continue throughout my lifetime...and, I believe, throughout eternity (since God's wisdom is infinite). Our understanding of the gospel is central and of utmost priority. It is the "power of God for salvation to everyone who believes" (Romans 1:16). If we get that wrong, nothing else matters. Once we've been born again through faith in the gospel, the Lord will unfold His Word to each of us according to His perfect will and timing (Philippians 3:15-16).

We must approach the cross empty handed and stay empty handed. We are not saved by grace "after all that we can do". We are mercifully saved by grace alone (undeserved favor). Once we are saved, God will work beautiful things through us during our process of sactification on this earth...but that is just evidence that we have already attained our exaltation. I will live with Christ for all eternity because His blood has washed me clean and He has clothed me with the protective garment of his perfect righteousness. That is the ground on which I stand before my Maker. He will continue to change me throughout this lifetime (Philippians 1:6), but I have already been made perfect in His sight (Hebrews 10:14).

Since you mentioned Luther...here's an interesting quote of his...

"O it is a living, busy active mighty thing, this faith. It is impossible for it not to be doing good things incessantly. It does not ask whether good works are to be done, but before the question is asked, it has already done this, and is constantly doing them. Whoever does not do such works, however, is an unbeliever. He gropes and looks around for faith and good works, but knows neither what faith is nor what good works are."

Luther agreed with James...he just didn't know it.

In closing, I have to speak plainly from my heart...I've spoken with a number of LDS missionaries and friends on numerous occasions and it never ceases to amaze me that they don't see the drastic differences in what we believe. I've read through the online version of Gospel Principles more than once and it doesn't take me long to see that we believe in a different Jesus and a different gospel. I say this as lovingly and respectively as it possibly can be said, the LDS Jesus and gospel are false and thus not able to save anyone. Those who are standing on that sand as their means of exaltation will stand condemned on judgment day and be sent to Outer Darkness for all eternity. It would be hateful of me to believe this to be true and say otherwise. I pray that you will receive this in the spirit that it is written, even if you disagree.

Those of us who profess to be evangelicals, please, let's use the power of God to defend our faith.

As far as the accusation that LDS are simply "stupid" or "brainwashed" in order to believe as they do...let's look at what our Lord and Savior speaks to us:

"Jesus answered him, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.'" (John 3:3)

And the apostle Paul, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit:

"For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written,

'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.'

Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

For consider your calling brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, 'Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.'" (1 Corinthians 1:18-31)

If you think that you are in Christ because you are smart...you need to go back to your Bible and be reminded of the Truth.

And as far as professing Christians being biblically ignorant, my fear is that many who profess Christ with their lips have not truly experienced this supernatural New Birth...they are not New Creations (2 Corinthians 5:17). For the Holy Spirit within a true child of God causes him or her to yearn to be taught and transformed through His Word.

"How sweet are your words to my taste,
sweeter than honey to my mouth!" (Psalm 119:103)

In fact, the entire Psalm 119 faithfully describes the heart of one who has been born again toward His Word. If one does not have this attitude or desire...it is likely that their spiritual taste buds have not been awakened to it's sweetness.

The state of the visible "church" in America grieves me as well. Although, as I have stated previously, there remain faithful congregations who love the Word of God, take it seriously, organize their congregation by its teachings, and teach it faithfully week after week after week. When we see what many would like to describe as "Carnal Christians" (I don't believe in such a thing...not to say that Christians don't struggle with sin, but their lives will not be charactorized by it), let's not be so quick to assume that they are truly in the fold. Instead, let's continue to speak the gospel lovingly and truthfully to them, that "God may perhaps grant them repentance, leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will." (2 Timothy 2:25-26)

I think this post will cover your remaining questions. I see that I'm getting more questions and I will do my best to respond to those as well. But I have to be honest, I'm no Bible theologian...I'm just someone who can't get enough of the Word of God - love studying it, love trying to explain it to others. There are many people out there who have much more knowledge than me and can articulate these things much better than me! I've recommended some resources in previous posts and I encourage you to take advantage of them. I also would like to recommend two more:

Counterfeit Gospels: Rediscovering the Good News in a World of False Hope by Trevin Wax

http://www.amazon.com/Counterfeit-Gospels-Rediscovering-World-False/dp/080242337X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1345934492&sr=1-1&keywords=counterfeit+gospels+by+trevin+wax

Am I Really a Christian by Mike McKinley

http://www.amazon.com/Am-I-Really-Christian-9marks/dp/1433525763/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1345934574&sr=1-1&keywords=am+i+a+christian

Here goes...last, but definitely not least...

Will all humans be resurrected?

Evangelicals believe in a bodily resurrection for all people (Revelation 20:4-5). God created us as physical beings and aside from our time after our death while we are awaiting His second coming (during which, I believe, we will be residing in heaven or hell as spirits) we will live eternally, on the New Earth or in Eternal Darkness in a physical body.

Again, why He chose to give us eternal bodies is not completely clear. But we can know with certainty – because we know His character – that this will accomplish the greatest glory for Him and the greatest pleasure for His chosen ones.

Does Christ still have his resurrected body of flesh and bones?

There is nothing is the Bible to indicate that Christ cast off his body of flesh and bone when He ascended to heaven forty days after His resurrection. To the contrary, the Bible teaches that we will have resurrected bodies “like him” (1 John 3:2) and that His bodily resurrection was the evidence – the “first fruits” – assuring us that we also will receive eternal, indestructible bodies (1 Corinthians 15:20, 23, 49).

My Pastor’s response: “Absolutely; it’s essential to orthodox Christianity (Acts 1:11, Matthew 25:31, 1 John 3:2, Revelation 19:11).”

If so, why does Christ get a body of flesh and bone but not God the Father?

Your phrasing of this question is interesting to me – why does Christ “get” a body but not God the Father. It seems like you are implying that God the Father is somehow lacking if He doesn’t have a body of flesh and bones. Each member of the trinity plays a unique role, both in the temporal and in the eternal. Christ, though He was “in the form of God” from eternity past, “did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross” (Philippians 2:6-8). That was His unique role; to take on human form in order to live a sinless human life and offer that life as a ransom for His chosen ones; and also to rise again with an eternal body – in order to show that He had conquered the enemy and that His sacrifice was fully acceptable before the Father He remains in a physical body in order to physically dwell with His physical people for all eternity (Revelation 21:3). There is nothing in the Bible to suggest that somehow the Father is inferior to the Son because He is spirit (John 4:24).

The nature of God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) is yet another one of those mysterious truths that we must accept because the Bible teaches it and not because we can make perfect sense of it. They are three separate personages and yet in some incomprehensible way they are one God (Philippians 2:6, John 10:30, 1 Corinthians 3:16). When evangelicals say use the term “God”, they are including all three in that title.

My Pastor’s response: “The Bible doesn’t give us a complete answer, but as best we can discern, it has always been God’s plan for a human to rule the world under God’s authority, exercising dominion over creation in God’s stead. This was Adam’s original commission in Eden (Genesis 1:26-28, Psalm 8:1-9). This human ruler bringing the earth into dominion would somehow bring glory to the Father. Adam obviously failed miserably, as do all Adam’s descendents after him (Romans 5:12-21). Jesus, the second Adam (1 Corinthians 15:47, Romans 5:12-19), accomplishes what Adam did not do. Through His perfect life, death, and resurrection, He is endowed with “all authority” over creation (Matthew 28:19-20). He becomes the God-human who rules the world in God’s stead (1 Corinthians 15:24). In His glorified body He will rule the New Heavens and New Earth forever, fulfilling what Adam failed to do. In this way, a human rules creation for the glory of God but since this human is also God, God receives all the glory.”

Amen

Susan,

The things you have been describing are beautiful and wonderful, and I thank you for sharing.

Also, you should know, that aside from the finer points of doctrine (Jesus didn't need His body anymore after the resurrection, the final judgement where the Just live in a New Heaven vs 3 degrees to that New heaven, closed canon) much of what you have had to say with a little tweaking, is not foreign to a Mormon Sunday School.

In fact, your description of heaven and hell as temporary until the final judgment is much the same as we see it, only we refer to it as "the spirit world" generally with "paradise" and "prison" as its major divisions. But still, we are speaking of the same things.

Of course there are still differences (such as our belief that because of Jesus's actions--1 Peter 4:6--during His three days in the tomb it is possible for souls to move between paradise and prison before judgment), but like I said, thank you very much for your time and attention to detail.

P.S. - Regarding a "closed canon," just how closed does it have to be to still be considered Christian? Some churches and sects use the Apocrypha, and even among those who do there are different views about which books are acceptable. Plus, Martin Luther was openly hostile to the Book of James and did not want it as part of the bible he used. Would he still be considered Christian? Also, many churches I have visited were convinced the Song of Solomon was not scripture, are they allowed to do that and remain in the fold? These are all sincere questions from an outsider.

Darren,

I don't mean to minimize your struggle; I know it myself. I simply mean to say that there are sometimes better things to do than just push back all the time. (Proverbs 15:1, and all that.) I guess having the family history I do we just get tired after a while. (My family joined in the Nauvoo days, was actually one of those in the group of wholecloth congregations that Wilfred Woodruff converted, as far as I can determine.)

The best that can be done after as articulate a rendering of the doctrines as possible is a simple testimony and a handshake, and moving on.

What is the purpose of the resurrection?

I’m not certain if you are referencing Christ’s resurrection or ours, but I’ll begin with Christ’s.

The Bible teaches that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins” (Hebrews 9:22). Clearly, this doesn’t imply just dripping some blood from a wound. The blood that was shed in the Mosaic sacrificial system came from animals that had been killed. Sacrifices had to die. The Garden of Gethsemane was a grueling period of testing leading to the self-less and humble acceptance of “the cup” given to Christ by the Father (John 18:11). But Jesus didn’t say, “It is finished”, until the moment of His death.

“Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil.” (Hebrews 2:14)

“And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.” (Colossians 2:13-15)

And on the third day, the Father said, “Amen”.

“For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol,
or let your Holy One see corruption.” (Psalm 16:10)

“They put him to death by hanging him on a tree, but God raised him on the third day…” (Acts 10:39-40)

Christ came not only to absorb the full wrath of God for the sins of His people through offering up His sinless life as a ransom on the cross (Matthew 20:28). He also came to conquer death through His resurrection. This not only assures us that He truly is the Messiah, but gives us the assurance that He will come again to raise the perishable to imperishable (1 Corinthians 15:50-58…which I’ll address later).

“He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent.” (Colossians 1:18)

“And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.” (1 Corinthians 15:17-19)

The resurrection of Christ is essential to the gospel.

What is the purpose of the Incarnation?

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1)

Before I address your questions in regards to the resurrection, I thought it would be wise to begin by discussing the Incarnation.

Evangelicals believe that Jesus has existed for all eternity and has always been fully God (Philippians 2:6). Along with the Father and the Holy Spirit, He had no beginning and will have no end. We do not believe that He is the firstborn spirit of heavenly parents.

Jesus did not always have a body of flesh and bones, nor did He need one. He was not lacking in any way prior to the Incarnation. But He was part of a plan - a plan from before the creation of the world (Revelation 13:8) – to become “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29)

As a brief aside, “the world” does not mean every human being…but His chosen people (John 6:37, Romans 8:29-30, Revelation 13:8, Revelation 20:15) from “every tribe and language and people and nation” (Revelation 5:9)…as opposed to the Jewish people only.

The sacrificial system under the Mosaic Covenant was intended to serve as a constant reminder of the heinous nature of sin - the wages of which lead to death (Romans 6:23). But even though God required His people to faithfully obey this system, it was “impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins” (Hebrews 10:4). Just as the “sacrifice” of Isaac (Genesis 22:1-18), this system was intended to keep their eyes fixed on the coming Messiah – “God will provide for himself the lamb for a burnt offering” (Genesis 22:8); who would wash away their scarlet sins and make them white as snow (Isaiah 1:18, Revelation 7:14).

In order for Jesus to become our Sacrificial Lamb, He had to become fully human; because only the death of a human could pay for the sins of a human. But only a sinless human could pay for the sins of another; otherwise his death would simply be the wages of his own sin. And the only One capable of living an utterly sinless life was God. So, God became a man - fully God, yet fully human – “For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily” (Colossians 2:9).

In closing to this post, I want to say that these concepts are very difficult to explain in just a few short paragraphs. There are SO MANY beautiful,and very important, details that I can't possible cover. I hope these brief posts serve to wet your tastebuds and move you to dig deeper - mining God's Word for the endless treasures it contains.

Third Question...

Where do we go when we die?

My Pastor’s response – “The souls of believers who die go directly to heaven (Philippians 1:21); the souls of unbelievers go directly to hell (Luke 16:19-31); at the Judgment, after Jesus returns, then believers will be given resurrection bodies (1 Corinthians 15:50-58) and enter the New Heavens/Earth (2 Peter 3:8-13) while unbelievers will be given resurrection bodies and cast into the lake of fire (Daniel 12:2, Revelation 20:11-15).”

Jesus told the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43) and the apostle Paul said that he would rather be “away from the body and at home with the Lord…to live is Christ, to die is gain” (2 Corinthians 5:8, Philippians 1:21). The Bible teaches that those who are resting completely on the finished work of Christ on the cross for their forgiveness and exaltation have already been “raised up with him” and seated with him “in the heavenly places” (Ephesians 2:6). His sheep will hear His voice and follow Him and He will GIVE them eternal life; which no one will be able to steal from them since they cannot be snatched out of His hand (John 10:27-30). When they die, they will be with Jesus in Heaven.

All those who are not resting completely on the finished work of Christ for their forgiveness and exaltation will die in a state of condemnation (John 3:18). “…man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment” (Hebrews 9:27). For those in Christ, their judgment came down on the cross (John 19:30, Romans 8:1, Galatians 2:20). They will enter into an eternity with Him. For those not in Christ, “they will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might” (2 Thessalonians 1:9). And we believe that eternal means eternal. Both states never end. There are no second chances following our death on this earth.

I'm rude and inconsiderate? When you insist on using a widely understood term in an entirely different sense, purely for the purpose of marginalizing good people from the community of Christians, not for reasons of ill behavior for for reasons of doctrinal purity? It's no wonder you subscribe so vehemently to the Creeds. It's that very narrow-mindedness that forced their adoption in the first place and wrongly put Arianism in the realm of "heresy," subjecting its good and decent adherents to decades of abuse, murder, torture and worse... all because they did not bow to "doctrinal purity." My fellow Latter-day Saints are to be praised for being respectful. Consider me one of the prickly ones who won't be bullied by ignorance. And I won't treat ignorance with kid gloves when I see it. That you do not "think" that history supports my "erroneous inclusive definition" is evidence that you do not know your history.

So let this be my final counsel to you - educate yourself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian

In my view, the term "Christian" is the right of anyone who wants to claim it. If someone tells me that they're a Christian... then I accept that. If they're willing to take that responsibility upon themselves and all that it implies regarding fellowship and service... then I'm happy to let them have it. And you should be as well.

Darren and Common Sense,

I left not 24 hours ago--though I keep getting emails from this blog--and look what you have done to this place.

You are both very passionate, but the point is to disagree without being disagreeable. Honestly.

Have you ever heard of the concept of blowback? Nothing to do with ballistics, it is a term used in psychology referring to the idea that facts and arguments do not, in reality, move people in their positions in closely held beliefs such as politics and religion: no matter what each side presents, the other merely "digs in" and holds more tightly to their position.

I don't suppose we've seen any of that here?

Melody, you asked how a member of our church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, could ever take Joseph Smith at his word. The answer is: we don't. No truly converted member of The Church ever has. We go straight to the source--God. We ask God if He & His Son really appeared to Joseph, if they really sent Moroni, if the Book of Mormon is true, if The Church is really theirs. Then, we let Him give His answer.

It avoids any interference from the "blowback" principle.

David,

I too am glad you posted - particularly your very first post. It was very informative and helpful. Judging by how many LDS have commented how much they liked his article, I think it demonstrates that the author is wrong on many levels.

So thank you for stepping up under potentially difficult circumstances.

Second Question...

Why are we on earth?

The short answer: For His glory (Isaiah 43:6-7, Exodus 14:4, Habakkuk 2:14, Romans 9:20-23).

As the Westminster Shorter Catechism states, “Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.” In my pastor’s words, we glorify God “through trusting and obeying His word [the Bible]” (John 14:15). Everything that He does displays His utter uniqueness, perfection, glory – which includes His creation. All people will bring Him glory, for all things were created by Him to serve Him (Psalm 119:91, Hebrews 2:10, Romans 9:17, 11:36). This is the case in the righteous display of His eternal wrath against the sins of unbelievers and His merciful forgiveness of those who cling in faith to the sacrifice of their Savior as their only hope of acceptance before His consuming fire of holiness (Hebrews 12:29).

And lest we think this makes God arrogant or means a grueling existence of plucking harps for all eternity…we need to consider with awe the nature of this God. He spoke a word and created all things out of nothing (Genesis 1) and He upholds the Universe by that same power (Hebrews 1:3). Just try to consider the incomprehensible magnificence of His creation (Psalm 19:1, Romans 1:19-20) and then imagine the arrogance of not wanting to exist for His glory and enjoy His fellowship forever.

Does this mean that we completely understand why He has gone about glorifying Himself in this manner? No. His thoughts and ways are immeasurably beyond our comprehension (Isaiah 55:8-9). There are times when we will be confused and perhaps frustrated (or angry?) because of what we don’t understand. It’s at those times when we must be like Job and put our hand over our mouth (Job 40:4) or be like Paul and speak to our hearts, “Who are you, O man, to answer back to God?” (Romans 9:20)…AND continue faithfully searching the Bible; praying for His Spirit to give wisdom in regards to what He has revealed and humble, faithful trust in His good and perfect ways in regards to what He has chosen not to reveal.

Your post was a good one David, well except for that Catholic thing. Don't regret it.

No, it's historically entirely accurate and you will be hard pressed to find any scholar of distinction (degrees from Southern "Divinity" schools don't count) who would agree with you. Then again, if you believe mankind to only be 6,000 years old, you'd be hard pressed to find any scientists who agree with you either. So "error" is clearly something your'e comfortable with. And if you think that Mormonism places the words of one man over the Bible, ask yourself why it is that the vast majority of Protestants, Catholic and Orthodox accept interpretations of Biblical scripture based entirely upon the highly specious political feud that dominated the better part of the 4th Century, starting with Nicaea and culminating with Constantinople? It's easy to just declare, "Arius was a HERETIC!" but the truth of that history is far more nuanced. And it all takes place hundreds of years after the books of the Bible were written. And during those two hundred some odd years, a lot of people called themselves "Christian," including "Gnostic Christians" who decidedly did not believe in any of the qualifiers with which Evangelicals now attempt to conscript the term "Christian." Scholars refer to these people as "Gnostic Christians." So you would take those scholars to task for using the word in its proper English sense (see OED under "Christian" and "Christianity") and not using it in the sense which post-Nicene "Orthodox" Christianity has used it, primarily over the past 80 years? Mormons are Christians. We want a term that is inclusive of all people who believe in Christ and strive to live his teachings. It is utterly unChristian to seek to monopolize the term based on doctrinal "exclusion" so that you can act as judge of people's hearts in God's place. That you're "done here" seems to be your m.o.

We'd be able to have a perfectly civil discussion if you'd simply accept the definitions accorded by the English language. If you used your narrow definition of "Christian" in any serious college course... you'd get flunked.

Think about that. And about how petty you're being about refusing to even accept a greater body of Christian fellowship, even with those who do not subscribe to your doctrines. Sad. Truly sad.

I have been a happy Mormon all my life. My parents will celebrate their 60th wedding anniversary this month. They love each other deeply and enjoy being together. I have been part of Mormon congregations in many states and a couple of foreign countries. The Mormons everywhere have always treated me kindly. I go to church on Sundays because I enjoy what I learn and being with friends. I feel the peace of the Lord's Spirit there. Though I never married and have no children, my church family has given me love and support. I don't feel fear.

That is simply historically inaccurate, but I am used to that from you. Mormonism would not exist were it not for the historical fact that the words of one man were given authority over the Bible.

Mormons are not Christians. And now, I'm done here. Feel free to talk amongst yourselves.

Sadly, I've known too many "Orthodox Christians" who *didn't* have even a passing knowledge of the Bible's history.

In fact, when I took some non-denominational college-level theology classes a few years ago, the first thing the professor did was spend about two weeks talking about how the Bible was compiled and transmitted; even he was frustrated by just how few people actually know this.

Since Mormons are Christians, your statement only makes sense if you say, "Orthodox Christians" don't understand. In that case, since we know what "Orthodox Christianity" believes, it's an easy question to answer. And the answer is... Mormons aren't Biblical literalists. In fact, they're not even scriptural literalists with their own scripture. And we don't just "accept the words of one man." It's a complete doctrinal system that grows progressively more extraordinary the more you study it. Unless you insist that the Bible is the literal, unalterable, untainted direct Word of God. Which is a virtually impossible position to take for anyone with even a passing knowledge of the volume's history.

Darren,

I don't think anyone said you or any Mormons were ignorant. Why must you always play the victim? I believe Melody was asking questions about discernment. Christians don't understand how Mormons can accept the words of one man (of questionable repute) over and above what God had already said before that man was born. It's not a question of ignorance but of authority and discernment.

[...] David French offers a few reasons as to why in our culture Mormons are outpacing evangelical Christians in growth. [...]

Why the presumption that "if Mormons like it, then it must be wrong"?

I'd really like to know.

Oh, and since Mountain Meadows was brought up:

"The Mormon Conflict: 1850 - 1859" by Norman F. Furniss -
http://product.half.ebay.com/The-Mormon-Conflict-1850-1859-by-Norman-F-Furniss-1977-Hardcover-Reprint/4548926&tg=info

"Haun's Mill Massacre" -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haun%27s_Mill_Massacre

So many anti-Mormons have turned it into a bloody shirt that most non-Mormons have forgotten *why* Mountain Meadows took place.

You see, it wasn't just "a group of Mormons randomly mowing people down". Rather, it was an isolated group of individuals seeking revenge for a massacre that had been perpetrated *against* the church in 1838.

Congratulations - you just proved what I said about people presuming us to be ignorant.

A lot of us Mormons have put more time, effort, and research into our being Mormon than a lot of mainline Christians have put into being mainline Christians.

oh and I'm done with this

Lots of liberals have degrees. There are people that have degrees in religion like Bart D. Ehrman that have absolutely no faith in the truth though they read it all the time. It doesn't seem to matter how much education he has. He still doesn't comprehend.

Galatians warns SPECIFICALLY against any other gospels. Why don't you find it ironic that Paul would mention angels even?

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.


Yet Joseph Smith with a questionable reputation not only makes that claim but he claims to see the face of God. Something that Moses was told wasn't possible without dying.

Exodus 33:20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

As to why alarms don't go up for you people? Got me. You are supposed to search out everything everyone tells you against the scriptures. None of you do that with what Joseph Smith said.

1John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

I do know that Jesus said to beware of the yeast of the Pharisees so I'm really wondering about TGC posting this article that is so happily received by so many Mormons. I'm guessing they forgot that part. So lack of discernment seems to be something suffered by everyone at some point.

Good Morning, SCNation,

You asked some great questions and although you said you are not looking for "super deep answers", some of the explanations required are a bit lengthy and "deep". There are things in the Bible that are "hard to understand" (2 Peter 3:16)and take some time to unpack in an intelligible manner. I'm also trying to answer them in such a way that hopefully shows the contrast between official LDS teaching on these things and how traditional biblical Christianity understands them. So, I'm going to take my time and anwer them in separate posts, one by one. I've also asked my pastor to assist me so I will be adding his comments to some as well. So, here goes on your first question...

Where did we come from?

Traditional Biblical Christianity does not believe in a pre-mortal existence. God formed Adam’s physical body from the dust of the earth and then “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” (Genesis 2:7). I believe most evangelicals would consider this to be the moment that Adam’s spirit was created within his body (Ecclesiastes 12:7, Zechariah 12:1). God knits our physical bodies together in our mother’s womb (Psalm 139:13) and also breathes an eternal spirit into each human being at that time. Traditional Christianity would understand verses such as Hebrews 12:9 and Acts 17:28 to simply mean that we are created by God – flesh and spirit; not that we were literally born as spirit children to heavenly parents prior to our arrival on earth in the flesh. They would also consider Jeremiah 1:5 to be speaking of God’s omniscience, not His relationship with us in a spirit world. He “knows” every human being before He creates them in the sense that He is outside of time and space and knows all things. He knows the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:9-10). So in that sense, he knows us before we even exist.

Not Donner, Mountain Meadows. Got my history a little confused.

Darren, after awhile you start to sound like you have a chip on your shoulder.

I may have met more jerks who claim to by Christian than you have, but let God be true though every man be a liar.

My Ph.D. committee statistician was a Mormon and one of the nicest guys I've met. I still think Mormon doctrine is non-Christian.

Can you say "Donner"?

What's the point?

I think some smart people died at Jonestown & in Waco. I don't think Mormons are brainwashed but I don't think intellegence has much to do with "brainwashing" whatever that is.

To those who try to argue that we Mormons are somehow brainwashed, ignorant, or stupid:

Mind explaining why the membership of the church includes so many people with master's degrees, doctoral degrees, and other high-level certifications?

...except, as noted by so many other Mormons here (including myself), the whole "fear" bit is vastly exaggerated at best.

If you'd actually pay a visit to a Mormon congregation, you'd likely see that most, if not all, of whatever preconceived notions that you may have are actually false.

Once upon a time, one of the local Mormon congregations served as the headquarters for the local chapter of Newborns in Need, an organization that made blankets and gift baskets that hospitals could give to the parents of premature infants so that they could better take care of them.

The woman who was running the show was literally told by some non-Mormons that they didn't want to set foot in a Mormon church building for *any* reason.

With the members of the congregation too busy to provide more than a few hours a month, hearing such cold-hearted rejection from more than a few local non-Mormons was too much for her.

The chapter eventually shut down.

Yeah.

Hello again,

I'm going to jump over the resurrection related questions for now since those will take a bit more time & thought to upack and go ahead and answer your last question...

Who said that the Bible contained all the words of God?

"Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written , I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” (John 21:25)

I’m not sure what you mean by “all the words of God”. God is infinite in all His ways so it is inconceivable that all of His words could be contained in a book…or millions of books. The Bible contains the words of God that we need to understand some of the very questions you are asking: Where did we come from? Why are we here? Where are we going? etc. It wasn’t written to tell us everything (Deuteronomy 29:29).

God determined what was necessary for man to know in order to answer these questions (Romans 15:4, 2 Timothy 3:16-17) and to prepare him for the coming Messiah (Luke 24:27, John 5:46, Acts 8:35, 13:27, Galatians 3:23-29). He then chose human vessels to write these things down through the divine guidance of the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:16-21, Hebrews 1:1-2), and preserved these writings in purity by His infinite power over all things (Isaiah 40:8, Matthew 5:18, 24:35, 1 Peter 1:23).

Jesus spoke from the Old Testament freely; never once claiming that the writings had been corrupted but many times fiercely rebuking the Jewish leaders for distorting its meaning (do a phrase search on “You have heard it said…but I say to you” and you will find a multitude of these episodes…or just read Matthew 23:1-36). He also stated that after He ascended to Heaven, He would send the Holy Spirit and He would enable His chosen vessels to remember the things that He taught them in order for them to record and teach others (John 14:26); solidifying the foundation of the Church through the prophets and the apostles, with Christ being the Cornerstone (Matthew 11:13, 1 Corinthians 3:9, Ephesians 2:19-21, 2 Peter 3:15-17).

In my pastor’s words: “2 Timothy 3:16 says ‘all Scripture is inspired by God’ and the New Testament authors clearly saw that as including the Old Testament and the apostolic revelation. The next big event on God’s calendar is Jesus’ return, so we wouldn’t expect revelation in the in-between time of the church age (Hebrews 1). It’s probable that there will be additional revelation to humanity in the New Heavens and New Earth. But that revelation will never contradict previous revelation.”

“God is not a man, that he should lie,
or the son of man, that he should change his mind.
Has he said, and he will not do it?
Or has he spoken, and he will not fulfill it?” (Numbers 23:19 – see also 1 Samuel 15:29, Malachi 3:6, Romans 11:29, Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18, James 1:17)

What we have is perfectly suited for this “in-between” time…the living and active written Word of God in the Bible (Hebrews 4:12-13).

As an additional resource on this topic...I am currently listening to a sermon series by Kevin DeYoung on the Doctrine of Scripture. I have only listened to a couple messages so far but they have been very helpful. I have found him to be a trustworthy source of insight into understanding and applying Scripture through what I have seen of his writings and various messages. Here is a link if you are interested (It goes from most recent at the top to oldest at the bottom...so you'll need to scroll down to start from the beginning):

http://www.universityreformedchurch.org/teaching/sermons.html?series=39

I really regret even commenting on this. I still agree that this article doesn't do anything to really help the "evangelical problem" but I realize my original wording came off strong and now it'll be immortalized until the Gospel Coalition (if it ever) disappears and that still won't change the damage I've done through my brashness. And for that, I'm sorry. Go 23 year-olds! Sigh.

Hmmm? I didn't know they spoke English in first century Antioch. I would have guessed Greek or maybe Latin, or perhaps Aramaic.

The biggest issue here seems to consistently be that Mormons call themselves "Christian" and Evangelicals insist that Mormons are not "Christian." Might I suggest that, as much as it bothers them to do so, Evangelicals please subscribe to the true historical use of the term and refer to their tradition as "Orthodox Christianity" or "Traditional Christianity." Mormons gladly distance themselves from those traditions, but not from the term "Christian" in its proper term as it was coined in the 1st century by gentiles in Antioch - specifically referring to anyone who accepted the claimed messianic divinity of Jesus Christ. "Christian" was first used in this loose sense nearly three hundred years before there was any such thing as a "Creed" and many decades before anything other than some Pauline epistles were adopted as Christian scripture. Please, please, please stop misusing the term "Christian" in this way.

Eric,

Of course there some people who hate Latter Day Saints and there are those who hate Christians too. My point was that Christianity, in general and doctrinally, is not "against" Latter Day Saints, but opposed to LDS theology because we believe it is not in accord with the Bible. Most Christian ministries to LDS are not anti-Mormon (though many LDS seem to prefer this term anyway).

It is a mistake to assume that I am anti-Mormon (I'm not saying you did that) because I think LDS theology is wrong. I can love Mormons and yet be fully convinced that their beliefs are false. As a matter of fact, if I am convinced that LDS theology is "another gospel", how loving would I be if I said nothing?

Most of the books I've read from ex-Mormons, including one written by a friend of mine, speak lovingly of Mormon people. I am called to do the same.

This is my final response to you. You are rude and inconsiderate and I consider your approach here offensive. There is nothing Christ-like in your comments.

Let me explain one final time. I disagree with you. I do not think history or the Bible supports your erroneous inclusive definition, nor anyone else's.

I understand that you can't fathom my reasoning. I don't expect you to. I will not agree with you on this no matter how many names you choose to call me. You are simply wrong. There have been many LDS who have been respectful here. You are not one of them.

It has been a treat, Mark.

And to read your comments also, rick and Susan. I just want to say that this has been the most comfortable, respectful, dialogue on this subject (Internet-wise) I have undertaken in quite a long time.

I think if you look over our comments from the beginning you will find that we all started with a bit of our armor up, but it has gone very well, in my opinion, or as well as could be expected. I want to thank you all for that, since this is, in the end, your page.

I will leave you now. I think two days is my limit for hanging around in the blogosphere, especially since I initially didn't expect to comment at all. Anyone who wishes to remain in contact may reach me though clicking on my name (I think).

As you may expect, I will leave you with my testimony. I have come, through a lifetime of experience, AND the witness of the Holy Spirit, to believe, and know, that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints really is the Restored Church of Christ in modern times. The principles taught there every Sunday--frankly, the fact that the Church is THERE as a Divine witness that HE STILL LIVES AND SPEAKS--give me a peace and joy that I cannot adequately communicate, but that I know every person on this earth can have for themselves.

I find, through my own study and with the Holy Spirit, the teachings of the Church to be in line with the Bible and I rejoice in the further light that comes from our additional canon. I do not seek to tear down or belittle your own view of the scriptures in any way. All I would say is that I feel to compare Traditional Christianity to a window with the curtain only half open. What you see is real and a true picture, but the picture is clearer and much more vast when you pull the curtains fully wide, as the Restored Gospel does.

All of you go in Jesus Christ. I hope our paths cross again.

Rick... I'm not trying to "convince" you of anything. I'm asking you to accept the definition of the English language. Go to any dictionary and you will definitions like those here:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/christian?s=t

The truth which Evangelicals need to accept is that their definition of "Christian" is not the one understood by the rest of the English-speaking world. Just as their definition of "cult" is not the same. So when they use these words in a manner that does not comport with the way they are understood by others, the result is misrepresentation. You know that. So when you use those words in a misrepresentative fashion, you are guilty of intentionally misrepresenting what Mormonism is. That makes you, by definition, dishonest. You're welcome to believe that Orthodox Christianity is true and Mormonism is false. But the definition used in the English language - and all other languages for that matter - is the same as the sense in which the term "Christian" was first coined in Antioch in the first century. The problem with your view is precisely there in your reply to me -- you refuse to accept any all-encompassing term for the body of all faiths that accept the divinity of Christ because you don't want one. It would "blur important distinctions." Which brings us back to the point in the article here: "They wrestle with the exclusivity of Christianity." You're looking for a term that is exclusive. I'm looking for a term that is inclusive. You're looking for people to accept, whole cloth, your interpretation of the Bible. I'm looking for fellowship with people who, though they may not agree on theology and doctrine, all believe in the divinity of Christ, His atoning sacrifice and our charge to love God and love our fellow man. May I say... I find your insistence on doctrinal purity at the expensive of Christian fellowship to be decidedly... unchristian and petty. Dare I even say arrogant, narrow-minded and so unbelievably centered on self-serving rectitude as to overshadow the essence of Christian teaching... which is to love your fellow man. Next time you read through the Christ's teachings... try focusing less on those finer points of doctrine that illuminate the mystery of Christ's identity and his "full divinity" and focus on the beam in your eye. By your reasoning, Fred Phelps would have the right to call himself "Christian" but a Jehovah's Witness dedicated to a life of service and love would not. I can't fathom how anyone truly devoted to Christ would believe that Christ would approve of his name being used that way. Sorry... but I truly do pity you. Your attitude stinks. And your historical knowledge is "substandard." To say the least.

Yes, Susan, Thank you.

@Darren,

I know how easy it is to get worked up in these situations, but please, you and I and all Latter-day Saints get so worked up and offended at other people telling us what we "really" believe. The last thing we should ever do is to do the same thing to others. That is not productive, and certainly not in line with the most important rule: Our Savior's Golden Rule.

@Rick,

If you truly believe there are no Christian Churches dedicated to opposing Mormonism (there are in fact, entire ministries, like Oklahoma-based Utah Missions, Inc.) then I would say that is more a statement on the decline of brick-and-mortar bookstores in general, not of any real fact. I have been into those bookstores, from the malls of California to the storefronts in Minnesota and here in Pennsylvania. The Anti-Mormon sections of the Christian bookstores exist. Often, I have seen them in the bookstores attached to the Christian Churches I have visited (which I often do while traveling.)

I agree with Sixmom. She basically wrote the same thing I was thinking.

She was correct about the sealing process between a husband and wife.

AS for fear keeping a marriage together. I totally disagree with David M. Perhaps from his perspective faith can be the only reasoning for why a couple would stay together. I think this is a weak and frail approach for him to explain something he obviously doesen't understand in the faith. The other explanation would be faith. Faith and fear cannot exist together. I suggest that faith is what keeps the couple together. They have faith in their believes and faith in the covenants they have made. Fear has no part and if it does, that marriage is doomed. It is this aspect that David M. cannot comprehend.

The same principal can be applied to "guilt" being the driving motivator. I grew up LDS. Sure, I felt guilt when I made bad choices. Guilt exists, but so does righteous desires. If guilt was the only lasting motivator, the gospel wouldn't continue like it has through generations. There will always be those who leave. One of Jesus's own apostles left, but that didn't mean the faith was untrue. We have our agency, and it is fruitless for one person to generalize the actions of another through a limited perspective. Your perspective is not mine. We differ, and I can honestly disagree with David M's comments.

Eric,

Yes, I understand that is what you believe. I am simply saying that this belief is not rooted in historical reality. Historical excuses do not provide any support for the BoM.

The apostle Paul stated that he did not shrink from declaring the "whole counsel of God" (Acts 20:27). So everything the Lord determined that we needed to know was fully-disclosed and written down by His chosen vessels at that time. Does that mean that no mystery remains? No. "The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law." (Deuteronomy 29:29) But we can trust that Christ fulfilled His mission, entrusted the COMPLETE message to His chosen instruments to teach and write down, and then proceeded to PRESERVE both His written Word and His Church throughout the centuries...even during extremely dark times when it appeared not to be so (1 Kings 19:14, 18, Romans 11:4-6).

Sorry, no. I'll continue to distinguish between Christians and Latter Day Saints. As I said we will have to agree to disagree because I do not think your reasoning is valid.

The creeds are statements reflecting Biblical truth. When they came to be is irrelevant here. The truth about who Jesus is that Christians believe today is the same truth the first Christians believed. No other opinion on that can possibly be valid, though you are free to believe it.

Quite frankly I don't understand your need to use the word Christian anyway, especially since Joseph Smith said that God said this about Christian churches:

"they were all wrong, and the personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in His sight: that those professors were all corrupt . . ." (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, vol. 1, p. 5-6).

As long as you follow the teachings of a man like that, calling yourself Christian is disingenuous at best.

You asked "what term would YOU use to describe the full body of all religious organizations and people throughout the world who believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, whether you accept them doctrinally or not?"

My answer is, if they deny the full deity of Christ, I would either use non-Christian, or the name of the group. There is no all-encompassing word that has any relevance or significance to me because it would blur important distinctions that don't need to be blurred for any reason.

I use "Jehovah's Witnesses" for example. You consider them Christian and I would say that is preposterous. JW's believe Jesus was Michael the Archangel. The Jesus of the JW's is NOT the Jesus of Christianity today or in the 1st century church. Not even close.

I use Mormonism the same way and will continue to do that.
So please stop trying to convince me to agree with your "loose" definition. Though I'm sure atheists would agree with that. I won't.

@rick,

Regarding historical context for the Book of Mormon vs. the Bible.

It is not hard to understand the difficulty. While one, the Bible, was constantly inhabited geographically, the other was not. Current scholarship estimates that by the time of the founding of Jamestown, the Black Plague and the Spanish attacks had wiped out 90% of the population of North and South America. 90%. It is difficult to ask for directions to Zarahemla (a Book of Mormon city roughly equivalent to Jerusalem in how often it is mentioned) when everyone who ever lived there or would ever live there is dead.

@Eric. Matthias presumably (I can't look up the verses right now) rubbed shoulders with Jesus and was on the periphery of the band of Jesus disciples. Just as a practical matter he never wrote anything revelatory that is now a book of the Bible.

We believe in a closed Canon; therefore any claims to additional revelation or new books of Bible are invalid. Even if we found one of Paul's lost letters to the Corinthians, which we know were written, these would not be included in the Bible.

I'm distracted, so if it seems so your're right!!

We certainly agree in the validity of these passages, if not in the interpretation. After all, if Paul was speaking in Hebrews 1:1-2 against further Apostles or Prophets, then he was speaking against his own calling. And if he wasn't, then he leaves open the possibility for further Apostles to be called, at least after the manner that he was. (Which is how Mormons believe Joseph Smith was called.)

Again, from Hebrews, if Paul in Hebrews 4:12-13 means literally what he is saying, then he is speaking only of the Old Testament--the only compiled book in his day. Perhaps there were copies of the Gospel of Luke or Mark circulating, but nothing standardized. Are you seriously limiting him--and yourself--to the Old Testament and maybe Luke?

Mormons believe God grows his word with the needs of His people, as He did with Christianity in the beginning.

Immozilla,

Sorry I didn't see this earlier. I would like you to consider two things about what you said.

First, Here's the verse I believe you are referring to:

Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. (Matthew 5:48)

The problem is that God doesn't say "do your best". He says his standard is perfection only.

Now you can say "why would He ever admonish us to do something that is impossible?" yet THAT is exactly what he says is required! You and I cannot BE perfect - no matter how much we try. But we can be made perfect:

For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. (Hebrews 10:14)

Our perfection and righteousness come only from God. Trying to be perfect will always fail and lead to a life of depressing unworthiness.

But how did God having a physical body become in conflict with Christianity in light of Luke 24:39? I have always wondered. This seems a good opportunity to ask.

My sentiments also.

I've actually learned a few things from a couple of the LDS folks on here. I still think the two systems of doctrine are incompatible, but I appreciated discussing with them.

@Mark,

Paul is used as an example in the Mormon community for the same reasons you say he does not work. We believe the ONLY way for an Apostle to be called is by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. We believe that the Apostles prayed about it and selected Matthias (Acts 1:15-26), and that was just as valid a selection--since it was an Apostolic Consensus--as Paul's Conversion.

And when, as you say, "they all died"--another example we use of the apostacy, because they could no longer gather to build that consensus--the only one who COULD open the heavens again was the Lord Himself.

Which, we maintain, he did. The quotes saying that Christ was sufficient, particularly from Hebrews, you have already pointed out as being spoken by Paul, who gets to say such things because he was called directly by Christ.

Susan,

Very well said! Thank you!

Mike, thank you for replying. I will peruse the article and get back with you.

Catherine

I can't speak for anyone else's personal motives for writing books/blogs, etc. or initiating personal discussions with members of the LDS church but whenever I do things such as this it is out of sincere, heart-motivated obedience to the Word of God.

"He must hold firmly to the truthworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it." (Titus 1:9).

"Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints." (Jude 1:3-4)

I'm sure there are people out there who are just looking for a fight or want to feel superior or a have a multitude of other sinful motivations for what they do. But that doesn't negate the reality that God commands us to do these things. I mean, there are horrible people out there in the medical world doing obscene things but that doesn't nullify the efforts of reputable doctors/nurses, etc. who do what they do because they sincerely want to help people to be well.

And please stop making broad generalizations about evangelical churches. I agree, there are many out there who fit the "itching ears" description in 2 Timothy 4:1-5. But there are also many who are preaching the word, in season and out of season; reproving, rebuking and exhorting with complete patience and teaching; sober-minded, enduring suffering, doing the work of an evangelist and fulfilling their ministry (2 Timothy 4:2, 5).

I feel educated, Mark. Thank you. This has been enjoyable. Best wishes.

I suppose my statement on the Judaism > Christianity > Mormonism is best understood with the idea that the Jews DID believe Moses and the other prophets, in the sense that the whole point of their worship was to point them to the Messiah, Jesus. They just failed to realize who he was when he finally appeared.

They Jews remain, to my mind and a great deal of the Mormon people, a chosen people of God who worship Him as best they know how--because they worship Him with as much of the knowledge He gave them that they would need up to the time of Christ. We refer to different manifestations of God's direct authority on earth as "Dispensations." The Jewish people are simply continuing under the form of Godliness of their (now closed) Dispensation. There will come a time, when the Lord returns, that the whole House of Israel will be converted. (Zechariah 12:10, 13:6)

We refer to Christ's Ministry as the Dispensation in the "Meridian of Time," and today's Apostles and Prophets as "The Dispensation of the Fullness of Times," (referred to in Ephesians 1:10).

So, that's a long way of saying, that while you may not see the correlation because you see Judaism as having "looked beyond the mark," as the scripture says, we see one as a natural outgrowth of the other--and all part of a larger whole.

It probably also explains our mostly cozy, sometimes strained, relationship with the Jewish community as well.

Okay. I don't go into "Christian Bookstores." I read lots of theology but everything has to be ordered online cuz it won't be in te local bookstores.

I have a Christian friend who says Reformed Theology is all an invention of men. Yet he's a member of our church because he can't find anywhere else that faithfully preaches to word. Go figure. That doesn't really bother me. Maybe he'll have an epiphany one of these days.

I would not condone any violence, false statements or disrespect. Maybe you shouldn't focus your ire on Christians in general.

Interesting article with enough truth in it to be valuable I think. Like every opinion based on statistics and personal observation there are going to be some inaccuracies and biases(both positive and negative.) I appreciate the tone of the article and what I believe was the intent.

based on my personal exp. as a practicing mormon I'd like to respond to two topics: works and divorce.

Divorce: My wife and I were married in the temple at 23. About 11 years later we experienced a period of serious stress on our marriage while I was deployed to Iraq. So serious we contemplated divorce. It was incredibly difficult and I really thought we were done. Just when I was about to give up I felt the power of my marriage covenant kick in. God stepped in and said, "No. You've made promise... an oath to make this work... there is a better way." He was absolutely right. Speaking personally without taking away from anyone else's experiences - I don't know that I would have had the faith to persevere were it not for the covenant nature of my marriage and the eternal perspective on our relationship. Thank God, indeed.

Works: Yes, I spend a lot of time serving in my church and yes the church asks it of me. It asks me to do things I wouldn't naturally want to do (clean the church, home teach (visit) people I'm not necessarily friends with, donate my money etc etc.) I will say that it is by doing those hard things that my Christianity has grown more than anything else. Are we saved by our works? Mormons don't believe that. But yes, growing, improving, becoming more Christ-like requires effort. IMO Christ changes us through our experiences, by his power. Our efforts and resulting positive, reinforcing experiences are the TOOLS, the FORCE or POWER is His.

Joseph Smith said "Let us here observe, that a religion that does not require the sacrifice of all things, never has power sufficient to produce the faith necessary unto life and salvation."

If the author of this article is accurate in his assertions and claims, the above quote may explain why.

Sometimes?

Some days I can only shake my head at how seemingly ignorant individual mainline Christians are of just what they profess to believe.

If nothing else, ministers need to ensure that there's a regular system in place so that their congregations actively read the scriptures and actively learn the history of their denomination.

Darren,

The Christian Church does not spend it's time and energy against Mormons. The purpose of pointing out errors in Mormon theology is not to win an argument, but to speak truth to you in love.

Your comments ignore the huge "backdoor" of Mormonism. I know many ex-Mormons. Though I can't provide statistics on this, I believe a number of ex-Mormons simply become atheists because they feel deceived by a religious organization and don't want to trust another one. I also know many who have become Christians.

This does not in any way diminish problems and errors within Christian congregations. You are right that churches and leadership sometimes fail their members and visitors. This only serves to show that we are all sinful by nature and need not to depend on organizations or people, but the words and the grace of Christ.

Go into just about any Christian book store and you'll find book after book, if not row after row of books, trying to argue that we're Satanic.

There are actually entire ministers and ministries who make their living knocking us; sometimes as part of a total "counter-cult" effort, while other times targeting us specifically.

That's right - anti-Mormonism is a cottage industry in both North America and Europe, with influence just about everywhere else in the world.

As a result of this, individual members have even been threatened with violence. In fact, about a year and a half go, a pair of missionaries in my area were threatened with guns one afternoon despite being shadowed by a crew from a local newspaper.


In contrast, the church's primary missionary effort comes through individual members getting out and meeting new people.

I have no idea where this victimization thing is coming from and I really have no idea what you are talking about. I have never been a member of a church that spent 1 nickle, as far as I know, campaigning against Mormons to win converts.

Also, I have to again ask this question of everyone -


Why is it that so many mainline Christian organizations spend so much time, money, and effort on "These other guys are Satanic! Join us instead!", when all *I* need to start winning converts is to crack open my D&D manuals?

I'd love to hear some sort of explanation for that.

Again -

Instead of spending all of this time and energy bashing us, why doesn't mainline Christianity instead opt to fix their own problems first?

My point is thus:

If mainline Christianity took even a fraction of the time and energy it spends against us Mormons and instead uses it to fix a number of the problems I've been highlighting (lack of religious instruction among the laity, limited fellowship, intellectual laziness among the defenders of the faith, et cetra), you guys would be in a lot better shape then you are now.

Instead, the more mainline Christianity ignores these problems, the more converts we Mormons get through our own personal efforts to overcome the same difficulties.

In essence, mainline Christianity has become one of the greatest recruiting tools we Mormons have to date.

I know I said I was done with this thread a few posts ago but something else has come to mind as I read through the comments.

I can only speak for myself and ask that the other evangelicals add their own comments if so lead...but I would much rather have my LDS friends, acquaintances, missionaries, etc. tell me point blank that the LDS church is the only true church on the earth (hence the only true Christian Church) and that all other "christian churches" are apostate than to take the "I'm okay - you're okay...we pretty much all believe the same thing...why can't we all just hold hands and get along" approach. I consider this to be the most loving, respectful and truthful approach in interactions between the LDS and evangelicals. It would also lead to the most productive dialog.

Again, it's not unloving to speak truthfully...only to speak truthfully without love (Ephesians 4:15-16, 1 Corinthians 13:1-13). I would not be offended whatsoever if an LDS said this to me in a loving and respectful manner. On the contrary, I would GREATLY appreciate the fact that they cared enough about me to speak openly and honestly about the major differences between our belief systems.

Darren,

I read the article thoroughly the first time. At minimum it demonstrates a departure from biblical doctrine, which essentially is the only thing that matters. Moreover, as a secular academic, it is common knowledge (even in secular academia, never mind Christian academia) that Mormon "scholarship" that ventures outside of and is at variance with the extensive corpus of biblical archeological and historical scholarship, is regarded as weak and marginal at best and fraudulent and blindly ideological at worst.

Again, a worldwide membership of a religious organization that has been around for over a 150 years that consists of merely 15 million members (and this is a gracious estimate) is nothing to brag about. You get that don't you? There are 100s of millions of authentic Christians. You understand this right?

But this line of thinking is irrelevant. Growth in numbers means nothing in and of itself. That facts remain, until you come to biblical saving faith, you are still in your sins, and at enmity with God. And more importantly, He is at enmity with you. I sincerely implore you to leave Mormonism and come to Christ. The biblical, true, and only Christ.

As far as your comment about fellowship. Your statement is purblind. The ex-mormons who attend my evangelical church of 6000 attendees spread over 6 campuses would strongly beg to differ. The sad reality is that the vast majority of Mormons have not come in missle range of experiencing an authentic church. Sadly, it appears you are in this category.

We are service oriented because that is what the Lord Jesus did. He served people. He showed them love by serving them. Yes, we are saved by Grace, but to truly be like Him, we must serve our fellow human beings.

Immozilla,

LDS theology concerning the nature of God, the existence of other gods and other major doctrines Christians disagree with do not come from the BoM. It is not primarily a doctrinal book. That's all I meant.

As to historicity, yes, I believe it is a critical component of faith. Faith must be rooted in reality. There are many books claiming to be from God or gods. But we know they can't all be of God because they say conflicting things. When there is no historical support for a supposedly historical book, that should at the very least be a red flag.

The Bible is both a book accepted on faith AND rooted in reality. We can go to the places named in it. We have found significant archaeological evidence. The BoM has no such evidence. The Mormon Church has not officially even claimed where the BoM lands are. So while it can certainly be accepted on faith, it is not historically rooted in reality.

a lot of the converts we get each year are people who "fall through the cracks" in their original congregations; either they get ignored, shunned, offended, or feel disenchanted for some reason. Rather than address their concerns, their ministers either ignore them or order them to just get back in line.

This may be so but I think it is important to recognize that the "Christian Church" in America is extremely diverse and that also can be said of evangelicalism. Within evangelicalism there is no authority structure because it is a movement, not a church. Evangelicals shop for churches like they're shopping at Walmart for every reason under the sun. It is not like the Mormon or Roman Catholic church where there is a top down authority structure that determines what is biblical truth. Many Evangelicals may have a very weak understanding of biblical doctrine. In fact many believe doctrine is bad. People "fall through the cracks" for all sorts of reasons; to escape church discipline, they don't like the style, the pastor is too old, the pastor is to young, the worship band is too pop, not pop enough, and on and on. Everyone does what's right in his own eyes. If you don't like your church you can start your own or just go on TV. It cannot be said that the evangelical church is not being the church. Within evangelicalism there are many churches that I would consider problematic and others very sound. Much of the "disenchantment" you may see may result from a culture of pragmatism, egoism, WalMart-ism, whatever-ism. I know evangelical churches people ought to run from but most are either attracted to it or wouldn't know what to look for if they did.

I was raised Episcopalian...I converted when I was 26. The LDS Church is anything except a cult. I took every religion class I could all through my college years -- this church follows the teachings of Christ and Heavenly Father more closely than any other church. AND we don't have coffee houses in our church buildings. We absolutely believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, we absolutely believe he will come again to judge everyone. It is not your job to judge us and say we are an affront and a cult. If you prayerfully read and study the Book of Mormon and use it along with the Bible, you would be AMAZED at what you will glean from it! God loves everyone including the shallow minded and judgmental.

Immozilla,

Thanks four your respectful comments as well. I know we disagree on this and, ultimately, that is the point. Christians and LDS disagree on every major doctrine. So I don't understand why Latter Day Saints are insulted by being called non-Christian when they think Christianity is wrong. It is impossible for both of us to be Christian, so either you are not or I am not. We need not blur our differences, but must face them honestly, openly and in love.

Just to clarify the Christian position on apostles and prophets I'll add this:

I believe Ephesians 2 can only mean that God began the church with apostles and prophets, but does not continue with additional apostles and prophets (it's important for us to say what a verse DOES mean, not just what it doesn't mean). But its not specifically saying that it's only the apostles and prophets before Jesus was born, just that once the church is being built, it is built upon those apostles and prophets who already existed, not new ones.

There can not be apostles today since apostles were those who saw Jesus and sent out by him (this includes Paul):

Am I am not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord? (1 Corinthians 9:1)

We are also told by scripture that God no longer speaks by prophets:

God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; (Hebrews 1:1-2)

And finally we know that at some point in time in our past, "the faith" was one for all time delivered to God's people. "Once delivered" means ONLY once; it means it will not happen again:

Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. (Jude 3)

I don't expect us to agree on this, but that only serves to demonstrates that the differences in Mormonism and Christianity are not minor. It is my hope that you will consider these things and continue to search the Bible for all it teaches us.

"You miiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight want to re-read the article.

They're saying that the church is doing a far better job of defending itself than the critics of the church are doing of arguing against it.

You see, a lot of the converts we get each year are people who "fall through the cracks" in their original congregations; either they get ignored, shunned, offended, or feel disenchanted for some reason. Rather than address their concerns, their ministers either ignore them or order them to just get back in line.

What does it say to you that we, on average, do a better job of fellowship than most "true" Christian churches?"

********

Darren,

My husband and I recently experienced very painful, un-christlike attitudes from the leadership of our previous church when we expressed concerns over the direction of the teaching/leadership. This did not cause us to abandon Christ and his gospel. It caused us to realize that we were in a community whose leadership was no longer walking in faithfulness to the teachings of the Bible and it was time to find a new church. As I stated in another comment, the 9marks ministry was extremely helpful to us as we began this process.

http://www.9marks.org/

Catherine,
Thanks for commenting on my post. Since there are multiple points here, I will focus on the essential question. You mentioned, “we are not a non-Christian sect.” To land in this category, a group needs to claim Christianity, but deviate from historic Christian doctrine. This is what the LDS has done. Here is a link to an early article posted on TGC with that shows the vast distinctions. When looking at the doctrine side-by-side, in order to be fair to the LDS, you have to admit the distinctions move beyond the foundational teachings of the Bible alone.

http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2012/04/24/the-faqs-are-mormons-christian/

Thanks,
Mike

You miiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight want to re-read the article.

They're saying that the church is doing a far better job of defending itself than the critics of the church are doing of arguing against it.

You see, a lot of the converts we get each year are people who "fall through the cracks" in their original congregations; either they get ignored, shunned, offended, or feel disenchanted for some reason. Rather than address their concerns, their ministers either ignore them or order them to just get back in line.

What does it say to you that we, on average, do a better job of fellowship than most "true" Christian churches?

Paul is not a good example to argue for continuation of the office of Apostle. Apostles were appointed by Christ. Paul was appointed on the road to Damascus by a observable appearing of Christ. His apostleship was also confirmed by the Apostles who had been with Christ during his earthly ministry. The Apostles were the commentators on the person, word and work of Christ's earthly ministry. No one after the Apostles of the first century was directly commissioned by Christ and confirmed by the Apostles. They all died.

"Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom he also created the world." (Hebrews 1:1-2)

"These things I have spoken to you while I am still with you. But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you." (John 14:25-26)

"Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all, for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God." (Acts 20:26-27)

Biblical Christians certainly believe that the canon is closed. When Christ came to fulfill His mission, He also chose specific vessels to teach and record everything we needed to be "thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

However, we also believe that the "heavens are open" in regard to the Lord actively speaking through His Word to His people.

"For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account." (Hebrews 4:12-13)

So...the Lord still speaks to His people, through the Bible, by the discernment of the Spirit, whom He has caused to dwell within them (John 14:16-17) and enable them in increasing measure to understand and apply those Words through the "mind of Christ" (1 Corinthians 2).

So would you rather we sit on the couch and wait for salvation like so many mainline Christians?

"The heroes of yesterday provide the motivation and guidance for the heroes of today."

Even "Transformers" gets the need for people to understand their heritage.

Rick, I commend you for being sincere and open minded enough to have studied the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price. Not many others who profess to "know" what LDS believe, have done that.
I am not sure how you came to a different conclusion to me on their truthfulness though, we can't both be right, one of us must be mistaken, and ultimately, I guess time will tell which.
I am a bit concerned about your statement that the Book of Mormon is not a book of LDS theology though. I have to say that is factually incorrect.
There is some historical support for the Book of Mormon, but surely historical support does not make scripture? If the Bible had no historical support, would that make it all invalid and of no worth?
I am fairly confident, time will find increased historical/archeological support for the Book of Mormon, but I personally do not need physical evidence to know something is truth. That surely would negate the need to have faith.

Thanks for the honest open respectful sharing rick, it's appreciated.
I am not sure the verse you quoted actually implies that there is no longer a need for Prophets of Apostles. It was Paul (the Apostle?) to the Ephesians, if I'm not mistaken.
Was he not called to the apostleship after the mortal ministry of Christ? If Prophets and Apostles were not needed on the earth after Christ, what was the point of those Prophets and Apostles who were called thereafter or remained thereafter?

I read in the Old testament, that the Lord reveals His secrets, to His servants, the Prophets. From Paul's example we surely learn that, that obviously didn't change in the years shortly after Christs ministry.

So then what was the trigger that made them no longer necessary? I haven't found it in my studies, nor can I comprehend that they would no longer be needed after so many thousand years.

I personally don't need to be called a Christian, although I do see how it seems almost insulting to LDS to be labelled non Christian, when they (try) to model their whole lives after Jesus Christ and His teachings.

I understand that we both believe different things, that is both our right and privilege.
If believing what I believe however, earns me the label of non Christian or Heretic or a cultist or ....., well that is unfortunate, but so be it.

I believe I am a very imperfect man, trying my best to follow *My* Savior, with the opportunity to become perfect, through the Atonement of Christ.

(apologies for any faulty grammar or sentence structure, I'm just an ordinary guy, not a scholar)

Eric,

I'm not sure if you were referring to me in regards to praying about finding a biblically faithful church to attend but if so, you disregarded my first major point which was to become a diligent student of the Bible. And we must PRAY for the Spirit's enlightenment when it comes to His Word because these things are "spiritually discerned" (1 Corinthians 2:14).

I am NOT suggesting that people pray for the Spirit to give them some type of subjective "testimony" about whether or not the Bible is true, as many Mormons have suggested that I do in regards to the Book of Mormon.

Prayer is essential in understanding the Bible, which is what James is referring to in James 1:5; not about knowing what is true (he firmly trusts the Scriptures) but how to understand and apply that truth. We must approach the Bible in complete trust that it is truly the Word of God and that He is fully capable of preserving it in purity through all time. Then, when people bring any sort of spiritual "teaching" to us, we must go back to God's Word and examine it diligently to see if what they are teaching is true, as the Berean's (Acts 17:11). We are never told to pray about truth apart from a careful examination of His Word.

"About this we have much to say, and it is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the basic principles of the oracles of God. You need milk, not solid food, for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, since he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil." (Hebrews 5:11-14)

"I have more understanding than all my teachers, for your testimonies are my meditation." (Psalm 119:99)

And as for those who are accusing people of making judgment about the validity of LDS teaching without studying it...I have been studying it for years from official LDS sources and become more and more convinced every day that its teachings fit perfectly with Galatians 1:6-9. I realize there are many who have not done their research and are commenting based on hearsay and assumptions but I do not fit in that category. I have earnestly sought to understand the LDS teachings so that I would never speak falsely of them or those who follow them.

SCNation,

I will try to set aside some time tomorrow to work on answering your questions, along with Bible references. :)

In the meantime, you might want to view my website to get an idea of my theology. It also might help you to know whether or not you feel that you can trust my exposition of Scripture.

Hi Susan, Thanks for your reply and links. Just to clarify, I'm not looking for super deep answers to all of these questions just some answers based on scriptures from the Bible.

If you have a few minutes maybe you could answer them??? Thanks in advance to any non-LDS individual who answers them.

A personal thank you to those Christians sharing differences of belief in a civil Christlike manner. When it is so easy to be the opposite. Although we may not agree on points of doctrine, (for what it's worth) you have my respect.

Samaritans were considered "not Jews." That being the key issue. Regardless, I'm asking you to accept the definition of "Christian" that most of the world accepts. It's supposed to be loose. As in "Buddhist" is a person who believes in Buddha. "Muslim" is a person who believes in Mohammed. "Christian" is a person who believes in Christ. This is the way the English language organizes these terms. The annoyance comes when Evangelicals co-opt the term and give it a definition other than what the English language assigns. So the question then is... what term would YOU use to describe the full body of all religious organizations and people throughout the world who believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, whether you accept them doctrinally or not? Whether you like it or not, we belong to the blanket body of faithful people who strive daily to live the teachings of Jesus. That blanket body deserves to have a name. For most of us, that name is "Christian." If you want to separate yourselves from our abhorrent doctrine, then please designate it as "Orthodox Christian" or "Traditional Christian" since, again, the creeds and doctrinal interpretations to which you cling did not take place until centuries after the term was first created. That is a fact of history. You cannot just elect to change the definition of a word because it suits you.

[...] 6 Reasons Why Mormons Are Beating Evangelicals in Evangelism One religious group shows consistent growth year by year and decade by decade. Mormons, living in the same country and culture as evangelicals, keep growing their church. Why? I propose six reasons. [...]

Immozilla,

Thanks to you as well. Enjoyed the discussion.

I am a Mormon who did not serve a mission and went to a Presbyterian college. That being said I was never harassed, harangued or otherwise made to feel guilty about my decisions. Even when I became inactive for a number of years members of the church did nothing but treat our family with kindness and respect through visits from our Bishopric, home teachers, and visiting teachers. I believe some of the "horror stories" come from those who are more likely to be dominated by those with stronger personalities. This paradigm is echoed through every religion, group, or culture. There is a oft uttered sentiment "The Gospel is perfect, people aren't." It seems the important lesson learned is that we need to support each other as fellow brothers and sisters in and out of Christ. In the end a true love of all our fellow man is the only true way to Him.

BRAVO! I so enjoyed this article! I am a 150% Mormon...the type you have described and you are correct about what is required to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons). It is a SIMPLE church to belong to for the Lord's teachings are clear and easy to understand; but, it is NOT an EASY church to belong to. Why? Because Faith is an ACTION word. The stronger your faith, the more you want to serve others, and the more you want to serve others, the less selfish and self-centered you are. Obviously, the less selfish and self-centered you are, the more you love others including your husband, wife, children, friends, neighbors, strangers, and even your enemies. Recently I heard this quote and it is one ALL Christians must understand and come to grips with: "The degree with which you love the Lord, Jesus Christ, is only as great as the love you have for the person you love the least." In other words, if you don't love your neighbor; if you are unkind to those who are different etc., you do not, you CANNOT love the Lord! I believe that everyone who teaches a knowledge of and belief in Jesus Christ is doing a great thing! Yes, specific doctrines are and will be different but can't we focus more on how we are alike instead of how much we are different? I LOVE being a 'Mormon' and I not only would DIE for my beliefs...I will LIVE for them!

Thanks to all, this has been enlightening for me. I can be contacted @ immo.beijerling@facebook.com should anyone wish to continue respectful discussion/sharing of beliefs. Love in Christ.

Yes, the only thing I would differ on is that it is not "eventually". It is right now. Though I would agree we are being sanctified over time, Jesus death on the cross provided the sacrifice that makes me perfect in God's eyes right now. It's not about how good I am, but about what he did for me. Hebrews 10:14 puts my perfection as a past event, not just a future hope!

With so many stories "out-there" of Mormons turning Evangelical, I thought this might be an interesting flip-side:

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=1016&sid=21598814&title=evangelical-pastor-of-27-years-recounts-journey-to-joining-lds-church

I don't think that a comment thread is the best place to get answers to such extensive, in-depth questions. Perhaps some sound theology books would be a better source? I've heard that Wayne Grudem's "Christian Beliefs: Twenty Basics Every Christian Should Know" is a great place to start but I haven't read it personally.

http://www.amazon.com/Christian-Beliefs-Twenty-Basics-Should/dp/0310255996/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=3VL0X07T18I4T&coliid=I2IJ8A9NYH5U5Q#_

I would also recommend the Grace to You, Desiring God, and Monergism online ministries as wonderful resources for sound, biblical exposition. You could do searches on all of these websites and find a plethora of information.

http://www.gty.org/

http://www.desiringgod.org/

http://www.monergism.com/

There are countless others, but that's a good start. Anyone else have suggestions?

Hey rick,

I think that is what I was saying, although I probably didn't phrase it well.

"When admonished by Jesus to be perfect, even as our Father in heaven, we are expected to *do our best* (for that is all we can do? We do our very best to follow the example of Jesus, and become what our Father has admonished us to be, the gaping chasm of distance between perfection and what we are is bridged by Christ) to be, why would He ever admonish us to do something that is impossible (Gods expectation/intention for all of us is to be perfect, even as He is)?
Through *Him*, we can eventually become perfect (The only way we can actually become perfect and as our Father in heaven, is through Christ)".

I'm not sure how much it really matters if mainstream Christianity agrees to share the title of "Christian" with Latter-day-saints. I think what matters most is that we can share what we have in common in good spirit, study the life of the Savior with devotion, try in all ways to be like him. And perhaps if we can try to be kinder and more inclusive we can work together for the common good throughout the world. There are many good things we might work on together and it is sweet when we do. Seems silly to waste our energy in contending with one another.

break the tenet of polygamy? Only about 5% of the church ever did practice it!

As I said, I do not agree with you. I do not see the full deity of Christ as "minutiae" I believe it is exactly what the first Christians believed.

There is no truth greater than who Jesus is, because there is nothing greater than God, who became flesh.

So I do not accept your "loose" definition of Christian. I don't think it was or is accurate. I know that it works for you though so we can agree to disagree.

An no, the Good Samaritan today would be more like the Good Al-Qaeda member. Samaritans were hated and considered dogs, Mormons are not.

I've heard that "bite" over and over again. Like "they" say, if you repeat it over and over enough, some people will believe it.

So the question becomes....if most Mormon's don't attend church or have quit attending church, why does the LDS church continue to build buildings for congregations at the rate of about 1 per day? Who is it that is filling these buildings? I can't imagine that they are filling them with "spirit" and paying the utilities for them.

There are still some places in CA that have 6 different congregations meeting in them every Sunday because they can't build new buildings fast enough.

While there is a captive audience here I have a few questions I'm hoping a non-LDS individual will answer. Here goes:

Where did we come from?

Why are we on earth?

Where do we go when we die?

What is the purpose of the resurrection?

Will all humans be resurrected?

Does Christ still have His resurrected body of flesh and bones? If not, what did he do with it? If so, why does Christ get a body of flesh and bone but not God The Father?

Who said that the Bible contained all the words of God?

That's a good start and thank you in advance for answering my questions. If you have the ability would you please reference scripture in your answer?

On the contrary, I'm all for defining terms. Which is why I'm asking that everyone use the term "Christian" in the sense in which it was originally used and defined. It is, historically and semantically, a loosely defined term that does not include the specificity you would like to assign to it. Everything else is theology, but the term "Christian" ought not be used as a synonym for a tradition that did not emerge until centuries after the term was first coined, especially when you're trying to back it up with scripture that wasn't even written at the term the phrase was coined. Jehovah's Witnesses likewise, are Christian. I'm asking you to recognize that the 1st Century followers of Christ who were first called Christians by the non-Christians at Antioch were so-called because they followed Jesus' teachings. Doctrine had NOTHING to do with it. FAITH had everything to do with it. The brilliant Scott Bartchy, a professor of mine at UCLA, once summed this up beautifully in saying that he was amazed at how much time and energy people devote to arguing about who Jesus was rather than focusing on what he said to do. I consider it rude, unkind, inaccurate and misguided to tell someone who strives every day, to the best of their abilities, to live the teachings of Jesus Christ... that they don't get to call themselves Christian because they don't accept this or that doctrinal precept. "Christian" isn't about doctrine. It's about how you treat your fellow man. Hence the whole point of "The Good Samaritan." If you think that parable is about helping your fellow man... you've missed the point entirely. It's called "The Good Samaritan" for a reason, and it was preached to the Jews for a reason. Today it would likely be preached to Evangelicals of your kin and it would be called "The Good Mormon." Go back... substitute those terms... re-read it... and think long and hard about being judgmental toward others based on minutiae of doctrine rather than the fellowship of man.

I live in Central Texas.

It's... bad down here.

Missionaries to far-off lands?

You guys would do well to send some missionaries *here* because of all the confusion that's afoot.

If it tells you anything, my high school principal was actually once quoted in a local newspaper saying that, to paraphrase, "Dungeons and Dragons is a recruiting tool for Satan; if your kids are playing it, seek help for them".

Again - the building I attend services at has been vandalized, entered, and even desecrated so often that the cops are on speed dial.

I think this question still has yet to be answered by one of the Evangelicals or anyone Non-LDS.

I take it that you're unaware of all the Mormons who have died for their beliefs?

Just in the 1980s / 1990s alone, 120+ Mormons were killed down in South America; someone spread a rumor that Mormon missionaries from the states were actually CIA agents, and the locals revolted.

Then you have the Susan Powell case, which basically boiled down to "Josh Powell's dad didn't want his son married to a Mormon."

Heck, go to any Mormon congregation and as around. You're almost guaranteed to find someone who has either been threatened with violence, actually received violence, or is but a generation removed from someone who has received violence.

Sorry, I do not agree. I realize defining terms does not help you, but I believe it is essential to know what words like "messiah" and "divinity" meant at the time as well as now.

I will continue to distinguish between Christianity and Mormonism just as I do with Jehovah's Witnesses and other groups who claim that Christianity is false but they are Christian.

There is no need for Mormons to try to include themselves in with a group they consider wrong on every major doctrinal issue. As long as Mormons insist on doing this they will be considered a cult of Christianity rather than a separate world religion like Islam.

Tom - I'm surprised you make such a generalization for why your Mormon neighbors choose to do things. I am a Mormon and I do a lot of things but I never do anything of value simply to add more good works to my judgement ledger (if you will). Sure I believe that faith without works is dead and that we are commanded to be anxiously engaged in helping others. That is all well and good but I and most of my Mormon neighbors help people because they need help. It's as simple as that. I'm not doing it to look better in God's eyes. God knows who I am and I have no hope that anything I do is going to change that. But I do have family, friends and neighbors who occasionally I can help in some way. It makes me happy to know that I can help and I am grateful that I can. When you say that Mormons only serve others so they can fill their good works buckets and get credit at the judgement bar, it's simply not true. I think most Mormons would say that they simply have faith in Christ's teaching to love one another.

This article mentioned the low divorce rate in the LDS church. If other women members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints are as unselfish, kind and forgiving as my sweet wife, then it explains why they are still married to stubborn, selfish men like us. Divorce is sometimes necessary, but if you think about it, it is usually the result of selfishness or sin in one form or another. The closer a person comes to Christ, the more likely they are to do the things that make their spouse want to stick around. Being faithful to each other, kind words spoken, honesty, forgiveness, anxiously seeking the comfort of the other. I have a long ways to go to catch up to my wife in Christ like living, but from an inside view of the LDS faith, the low LDS divorce rate is one of many indicators that something about the church is helping its members to “come unto Christ”.

Liked your article! As an LDS Member, nearly lifetime,....there is plenty here for us Mormans to remember and live up to!

I keep thinking about the comment about how Mormons work with the governments that they are welcomed by as if this was oh so smart. Then I think about the little Pakistan girl facing prison for being a Christian and all the others that have died for the gospel. I guess some things are worth dying for and something aren't.

No, it doesn't depend on what I mean by messianic divinity. It's that simple. Do you or don't you believe that Jesus is the "Messiah" prophesied by Old Testament prophets like Isaiah? Yes? Then your'e a Christian. No? Then you're not. It's no more complicated than that. We can dance on the head of a pin about everything else - I could even go off on a tangent about how the ancient Israelites absolutely believed in a plurality of Gods, but were "monotheistic" (as are Mormons) because they only WORSHIP one... but that's entirely beside the point. We could also talk all about Arianism and the persistent view in the Greek east for hundreds of years prior to Nicaea and Constantinople that Jesus and God are separate beings... an idea that continued to persist right through the Great Schism itself, in many cause causing it... but that also, is beside the point. It's this simple... is Jesus the Messiah? Did he die for the sins of all mankind? Do you believe in the atoning sacrifice? If you answer yes to those three questions... you are, by definition, a Christian. Everything else merely defines what kind of Christian. So please, just use the phrase "Orthodox" or "Traditional Christianity." Because the problem is this... when you go around declaring Mormons aren't Christians, the typical understanding is that we no no way believe in Christ at all, in the Bible at all, in the atonement, etc. But we do. And that's just an unfair misrepresentation. It's a cop-out. It's a way of dismissing Mormonism and evading the theological debate without ever engaging it. And that's not just semantically wrong, historically incorrect and fundamentally unfair... it's intellectually dishonest.

David:
Your 1st point is not correct. I am a female Mormon that was married in the temple and later divorced. I have since re-married in the temple to my second husband. I also have many friends and know of many female members that have been able to be re-married in the temple after a prior failed temple marriage. The church does grant temple divorces. Like many churches, including the catholic church, divorce is discouraged. We should always try to work out our differences and do all we can to keep the marriage and family together - that's how we learn, grow and become less selfish. However, there are valid reasons for divorce - among them: abuse, adultery, and addiction. The church recognizes this and allows for temple divorces for various circumstances which are looked at case by case.

I guess it depends what you mean by messianic divinity. I believe I can say with certainty that no Jew looked for a second god to worship or serve. So the minimalist definition of Christian would include monotheism.

Since more than one Latter Day Saint here has said that they worship the Father and the Son, yet they are two different beings (gods), I'm not sure if henotheism is even an appropriate term anymore. But there is no indication from scripture that the first Christians believed in any other gods. So the minimalist definition would be a monotheist who accepted Christ as Lord and God.

Acts 11:26

I agree, fear of divorce is not an issue. This article is well done. I commend the author for his honesty and integrity. Too bad that the naysayers, the ones who left the LDS church, have such a big voice and the time to be up at 3:30am and playing on the computer. As for me, I love being a member of the church, have a fulfilling life with all it's challenges and joys, because of my active membership in the LDS church. I walked the other road for awhile, but that was a shallow and lonely road, with guilt as my only companion most often. I love how the Lord, through his servants, will give me callings within the church that help me discover my talents and gain more confidence in the knowledge that God truly does love us, knows each and every one of us and wants us to be happy. Through these callings we learn to love in a better and more complete way, and we learn to serve in a more caring way. What more can anyone ask for, than to know we are loved and can give love in a meaningful way?

Mark, at the risk of butting, we understand the Atonement as "infinite." It began in Gethsemane, during His prayer, when He sweat great drops of blood (and was why he needed the angel in Luke 22:43) as He took on the sins of All Mankind. Then, with those sins on His shoulders, He suffered and died on the cross, and then rose the third day with, as the scripture says, "healing in his wings" (Malachi 4:2) for all who believe on His name.

But as James 2 points out we see believing as an action word. Christ said, "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." (John 3:5) He also said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." (Mark 16:16) Implying of course, that a non-believer is also a non-baptized person so baptism is quite vital. There are things to DO to show our faith, even if all the power and grace comes from Christ Jesus. After all, even though the interpretations of dreams was a gift of God, Daniel and Joseph still had to stand before their respective rulers and bear witness to give those gifts life.

BTW, we don't believe God eternally condemns all sinners. We believe that SIN eternally condemns all sinners. And since "all have sinned and come short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23) God so loved the world that He sent His Only Begotten Son. (Don't think I need to provide that reference.)

Smoke screen didn't work.

Blessings.

I was trying to give an thumbnail sketch of Paul's overall teaching on the first Adam - second Adam motiff. This is a major idea in the theology of Paul so I think it is important to get the big picture. I'm not at a place right now where I could do a reasonable exegesis of that text.

I also would agree that Paul is not being individualistic (talking exclusively or even primarily about individual salvation), however, I don't think he is being a universalist either. He is referring to the body of believers (all who love Christ) of which he is the head, or the harvest of which he is first fruits (this ties in with resurrection). This is not individualistic nor universal but corporate and personal.

David, you may have ground that axe a little too sharply, but you are a gentleman.

* like *
Awesome job. I appreciate your input. It rounds out the article and the arguement.

But remember that "death and hell" eventually give up their dead for a final judgment (Rev 20) after which it is only death and hell that are thrown back into the lake of fire. Because only those who are not written in the book are cast there, and when death gives up its souls, everyone is judged out of the books. (Read Revelations 20 very carefully, and compare with Revelations 7:9)

Just for clarification...it is not judgmental/hateful/mean-spiritied/bigoted/anti-anything to speak the truth. It is hateful to do so without love (1 Corinthians 13). Love REJOICES with the truth (1 Corinthians 13:6).

If someone truly believes that an individual or group of individuals are in eternal danger it would be hateful to stay silent.

"Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all, for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God. Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore be alert, remembering that for three years I did not cease night or day to admonish everyone with tears." (Acts 20:26-31)

As the apostle Paul fervently demonstrates, speaking the truth - the WHOLE truth - is not hateful. On the contrary, it is showing authentic, sincere, divinely sober concern for the eternal state of people's souls.

Would it be loving for a doctor not to tell his patient that he has cancer because it might be extremely difficult to hear and the treatment painful to endure? Would it be loving not to tell someone in the path of a wildfire to flee for their lives because it might cause them anxiety as they frantically pack up a few meager belongings and grief as they consider the loss of all of their cherished posessions/memories? Obviously not.

So would it be loving not to tell people that they are in danger of eternal damnation and offer them the remedy if you honestly believe from the depths of your heart that this is what the Bible clearly teaches and commands us to do? I'll risk the slander and name-calling in order to truly love people in faithfulness to the Words of my Savior.

Lastly, if it is hateful to talk about the wrath of God and eternal condemnation then Jesus Christ himself was full of hate. I believe that He spoke of these things more than anyone. Probably because He loves us more than anyone.

But again, Mark, this fails to address the use of Adam and Christ in this context in this verse. Paul does not go on to speak of the "last Adam" until verse 45, equating Christ as one who brings us all into new spiritual lives at this point. But even then a very strong case could be made (and is made by our Church) that he does not speak here of some internal spiritual renewal only, but a specific and vital ressurection brought about by Christ for us all (verse 42). And, as verse 41 points out, the nature of that resurrection is a vastly different from person to person as all the different celestial bodies in the heavens (but notice that all the bodies Paul lists are celestial bodies). Though we have taken, in our church, to giving them three distinct general categorical names besides Celestial, that does not change the fact that they are all "heavenly." (As in Paul's 1 Cor 12 comment on the 3rd heaven.)

Anyway, the point I am making is that we believe in the LDS Church that the Resurrection is universal. And that there is a biblical case for it. What we are resurrected to, is up to our relationship with our Savior.

And so, coming back to my original, original point, Mankind is basically good. I am not trying to fight with you here, simply provide the Mormon perspective.

I would like to get people's opinions on these videos the LDS Church created about the Life of Christ according to the KJV.

http://www.lds.org/bible-videos/?lang=eng

I would like to come back to the original topic of this blog -- church growth, whether this means greater numbers of converts or a deeper understanding of the truth. Both of these are claimed to be important by all groups alleging to promote the gospel of Jesus Christ.

What is the foundation of the church of Jesus Christ? The New Testament (hereafter, NT) tells us it is Christ – his person and work. "For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ" (1 Cor. 3:11). Jesus said HE was the one of whom the Old Testament (hereafter, OT) writers spoke: "For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me" (John 5:46).

The burden of the NT is to show that the OT focused on and was fulfilled, and is still being fulfilled, in Jesus (Acts 8:34-35; 18:28; 28:23). Our Lord did not come preaching a new religion but claimed to fulfill the existing promises, types, shadows and prophecies already given through Israel (Rom. 15:8-13). "And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself" (Luke 24:27).

Many groups outside of mainstream evangelical Christianity claim that the gospel was lost, at one time or another, or that the church drifted from the truth and lost its focus on the true gospel. And so they offer their special interpretations of the Bible or additional revelations from God to 'clarify' or 'complete' the truth. Individuals and groups certainly do drift from the truth, but this does not mean that the truth has been lost. God has preserved it in written form.

In my opinion, this is where humble, civil and respectful conversations should focus between parties on all sides of any religious controversy. Was the gospel lost? Do we need additional revelation? Or do we need clearer understanding and insight concerning what has been given and preserved by God (Luke 24:44-49)?

Paul told Timothy that his upbringing in the OT scriptures was sufficient to make him "wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 3:15). The NT shined more light on the OT but it did not change it or replace it. There was continuity of truth because God preserved His truth even in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation. The promise given to Abraham by God – that He would bless the world through Abraham's descendent (or seed) – remained unchanged and was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Gal. 3:16).

So what is the gospel of Jesus Christ? This is the foundational and final test for examining what any individual or group advocates. I believe this is a faithful summary from "Together for the Gospel."

"The Gospel is the joyous declaration that God is redeeming the world through Christ (Matt 1:21; Luke 1:68; Eph 1:7; Col 1:20), and that he calls everyone everywhere to repent from sin and trust Jesus Christ for salvation (Mark 1:15; Acts 2:38; 17:30).

Each of us has sinned against God (Rom 3:23), breaking his law and rebelling against his rule, and the penalty for our sin is death and hell (Rom 6:23). But because he loves us, God sent his Son Jesus (John 3:16; Eph 2:4; 1 John 4:10) to live for his people’s sake the perfect, obedient life God requires (Rom 8:4; 1 Cor 1:30; Heb 4:15) and to die in their place for their sin (Isa 53:5; Mat 20:28; 26:28; Mark 10:45; 14:24; Luke 22:20; John 11:50-51; Rom 3:24-25; 4:25; 1 Cor 15:3; 2 Cor 5:21; Eph 5:2; Heb 10:14; 1 Pet 3:18).

On the third day, He rose bodily from the grave (Mat 28:6) and now reigns in heaven (Luke 22:69; 24:51; Heb 8:1), offering forgiveness (Eph 1:7), righteousness (Rom 5:19), resurrection (Rom 8:11), and eternal blessedness in God’s presence (Rev 22:4) to everyone who repents of sin and trusts solely in Him for salvation."

Evangelical Christians who agree with this statement also believe that salvation is more than mental assent to doctrinal propositions. Salvation involves a change of heart, life, character and behavior. True saving faith is proven real by spiritual fruit or good works and love (Matt. 7:16; John 13:35; Gal. 5:22; James 2:26).

Good works do not earn or merit salvation. Salvation was earned by Christ (Heb. 9:12). But perseverance in good works show that the true believer’s heart has been changed by God's grace; i.e., that he or she has been saved (Rom. 11:22; Eph. 2:8-10; Heb. 3:6, 14; 5:9; Rev. 2:26). The New Covenant which Jesus secured by His blood (Matt. 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25) includes both forgiveness of sins, by Jesus' atoning sacrifice, and a changed heart, by the Holy Spirit imparting new life and understanding to the believer in Christ (Acts 26:18; 2 Cor. 4:6; Eph. 1:18; Heb. 10:8-18).

I would encourage all readers to carefully examine this fine presentation, "What is a Biblical Christian?" (http://www.the-highway.com/Gospel_Martin.html). This focuses on what is most important in determining if we are saved as an individual and if our church or group is presenting the gospel of Jesus Christ faithfully.

As a Mormon, I feel it important to highlight the obvious in an already overlong comment thread. While the author's "reasons" are sincere, it's significant that they do not correspond to the obvious... which are the previously stated reasons why Evangelicals are not growing. It is precisely because Mormonism represents an opposing position to every single one of those "complaints" that there is growth in the one and not in the other. Take them one by one:

The church is overprotective. - Mormonism encourages adherents to be "in the world but not of the world." Mormons, by a significant margin, are better integrated in mainstream society and popular culture. You particularly find them entrenched in the oft-maligned entertainment industry, which Evangelicals typically shun.

Their experience of Christianity is shallow. - Because Mormonism has a gnostic component - which Evangelicals consider heretical - and because it has additional scripture and extremely detailed doctrines that expand on areas only hinted at in the Bible, the one thing it cannot be accused of is being "shallow."

Churches seem antagonistic to science. - Mormonism is non-literal in its approach to scripture and embraces "all truth," as LDS Prophets have continually stated. All scientific truth is embraced and conformed with scripture and revelation. There are even noteworthy LDS scientists, one of whom was the father of present LDS Apostle (also a scientist) Henry B. Eyring. LDS doctrine also teaches that "natural law" is the law that governs all, and that even God is subservient to natural law. This places science above God... and does not view God as the author of science.

The church's approach to sexuality is judgmental and simplistic. - LDS views of sexuality are no less conservative than those of most evangelicals, but because we believe we are literally the spirit offspring of deity, because we believe that earthly relationships and families are a facsimile of eternal families, "sexuality" has a spiritual dimension, an eternal dimension and is not a purely biological or physical function.

They wrestle with the exclusivity of Christianity. - Double-edged sword. Being "Exclusive" and being "Inclusive" is a "glass half full" versus "glass half empty" kind of scenario. If you preach Christian doctrine as "exclusive" rather than "inclusive," that is how people will interpret it. It's about messaging.

The church feels unfriendly to those who doubt. - This is more about culture than doctrine. There are certainly places where Mormons have this same reputation, but because we are encouraged to be "in the world and not of the world," Mormons tend to adapt better to urban and culturally diverse surroundings. The parochialism of homogenous communities and "small town America" is more an exception to Mormon culture that is localized in places like Idaho and Utah. The core of Evangelicalism is in "Middle America," in the rural and suburban towns and localities outside the major urban centers.

The short answer to all this is that Mormons probably feel more at ease reconciling their faith with the modern world around them whereas Evangelicals feel a certain hostility toward and coming back from the modern world. The so-called "Culture Wars" are emblematic of this. Mormons don't really see any such thing as a "Culture War." Just the world God gave us and the challenges given us to learn, grown and improve our lives and grow spiritually stronger. Whether right or wrong, Evangelicalism's reputation is one of being at odds with the modern world and popular culture in general - a hostility that undoubtedly makes it hard for many, particularly the young, who would rather not have to choose between the two.

Finally, for the ex-Mormons who have been posting here - while the misrepresentations are too numerous to address individually, suffice to say -- in my view, your experiences are not representative of what the Church's culture is, and certainly not what it aspires to be. Every experience is individual but mine certainly has never in any way been reflective of those posted here.

@Catherine. At the risk of butting, in how do you understand the atonement? How is it that Christ justifies his people before God? How do they become legally acquitted of sin? Not only how do they become legally not guilty, but legally righteous, before a just God who will eteranally condemn all sinners? How is it that God remains absolutely righteous and just while at the same time forgiving sinners?

Mr. French:

Thank you for taking the time to share your personal observations why the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) is growing so fast in the United States and worldwide. I'm sure our Church can also learn a great deal from the best practices of the evangelical churches.

What always amazes me is the fact that while only one-third of the world population is Christian, yet some Christians seem to delight in trying to judge and attack fellow Christian churches. It seems to me that if we Christians are going to successfully take the gospel of Jesus Christ to the other two-thirds of the world, like the 55,000 non-paid Mormon missionaries are trying to do, then we ought to try and learn from one another, and support one another's sincere missionary efforts.

Jesus Christ taught us to, "Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned:" (Luke 6:37 ). While all Christians may not agree with all aspects of another's religious theology or philosophy, we should rejoice in the the fact that we all love Jesus, believe in His saving divinity, desire to follow His teachings, and rely on His saving grace.

Although the rise and growth are remarkable, there are still a lot of questions, curiosity, misunderstandings, and misinformation about the LDS Church.

For those sincerely interested in learning why the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is now the "fourth-largest denomination in the United States", with more than 5.5 million American Mormons, and 14.3 million worldwide members, simple go online to www.mormon.org.

May we all strive to love one another and learn to cheerfully adopt the best practices and teachings from one another's religious beliefs.

Mike, what is it about the LDS that you think precludes us from being a church in the true sense of the word?

There are not many variations of Mormonism. There is one Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, while the FLDS and RLDS have completely gone away from the doctrines we teach and we claim no connection to them. They have different doctrines, different rites and practices, and different leaders.

Thirdly, we are not a non-Christian sect. We believe in Christ. We are driven by our love of the Savior and our belief that he is the only one through whom salvation is obtained. We do believe in works, yes, but we also believe in grace. We believe it is incumbent upon every individual to live according to the knowledge he/she receives (works), and when we fail in one aspect or another, it is through the Savior's Atonement that we obtain mercy (grace) and strength to get back onto the path. Because we are all sinful, we could not return to God without his sacrifice.

Our devotion is not based on fear, it is based on love and a desire to live with God again. I know I will not be able to persuade you to believe what I believe, but can I at least ask you to try to see that your accusation of being non-Christian is hurtful to the many Latter-Day Saints who are living their faith? I don't understand why so many people don't want to see us as we really are.

@Eric. In a nutshell Paul's doctrine of the 2 Adams boils down to all men either being in or represented by the fallen first Adam, i.e., the one created in the garden, or in or represented by the 2nd Adam who is Christ Jesus. All humankind are either in the 1st Adam or in Christ; the two are antithetical. Only those who believe in, worship, and obey Christ are in him. All others remain in fallen Adam. Those who are in Adam 1 walk according to the flesh whereas those in Christ walk according to the Holy Spirit. Those who are in Adam 1 are dead in sin whereas those who are in Christ are alive to him; they are a new creation, citizens of heaven, children of light (as opposed to darkness). It is the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit to transfer people from the present evil age to Christ's heavenly kingdom, to make dead people Spiritually (Holy Spirit) alive, that is characterized by the work of the Holy Spirit which is the Spirit of Christ.

I am LDS (Mormon) and I liked the opened mindedness of the article. I appreciate the author taking the time to look objectively without any prejudice. As a Mormon I am a Christian, it is not anyone’s place to judge me to exclude me from my faith in Christ. Some of the posted comments come across judgmental and bias. I would expect that. Some people posted personal experiences, which is their own experience and should not label the whole Church based on the actions of a few.
So are Mormons Christians? YES! As a Latter-day Saint, I have been taught, and have personally chosen, to accept Christ as my Savior. I am taught to follow Him and feast on His word. I have no qualms in insisting that real Mormons are Christians. We worship Christ and covenant to follow Him. We are baptized in His name to follow Him, we partake of the sacrament (the holy communion) weekly to remember the sacrifice of His blood and to remember His victory over death, we pray to the Father in His name, and we strive to obey Him, knowing that it is only through His merits and grace that we are saved. He is constantly held up in our meetings as our Savior, our Redeemer, our Lord, and the author of our faith and our salvation. We believe that He stands at the head of His living Church, leading it as in days of old through revelation to His prophets and apostles. The Christ we worship is the living Christ, the Son of God, foretold in the Old Testament, revealed in the New Testament, and affirmed in The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ.
We are Christian because we look to Christ for salvation and worship Him and the Father. We are not saved by our works, but through the grace of Christ (as explained more fully below). We believe in God the Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost as the members of the Godhead, being one in purpose, heart, and intent. I discuss these issues more fully below, noting that we do differ from many churches in our theology. Although I may disagree with the theology of some other Christians, which gives me no right to say that they are not Christians because they don't see things the way I do. If someone looks to Christ for salvation and seeks to follow Him, in my mind, that's enough to qualify as being a Christian, regardless of other theological differences.

Darren,

Thank you for the link; it strengthens my point. Moreover, it further demonstrates that Mormonism sits squarely outside of orthodox Christianity.

As with many spurious sects not rooted in Truth, Mormonism has demonstrated the means and the will to morph and re-invent itself to stay relevant. In the West, Mormonism has had a successful PR campaign over the last 2 decades and even softened some of its more heretical doctrines. Nevertheless, key issues regarding the Godhead and soteriology continue to be heretically misunderstood.

Not sure what you mean about rapid growth and winning. While Mormonism is growing at a rate that could be described as rapid in certain countries, with a membership of less than 15 million worldwide (less than the population of Beijing to put it in perspective), pride in growth and numbers is silly and myopic. Nevermind that souls are on the line and your perspective betrays a great disconnect with the gravity of your situation. Proverbs 14:12.

How do you know he was a liar? Did you know him personally? What are you basing your opinion on? Rumors? Until you know someone personally you cannot in truth say you are correct about them.

My guess is that you have never actually taken the time or had the courage to check out what Mormons believe from their OFFICIAL website (lds.org)- you're only hearing rumors and basing your opinion upon them, which makes you a liar as well.

Then what is to be made of the equation of Adam and Christ on this context? I would love your thoughts as an alternate theologian.

I disagree with a lot of what you've said, but let me just say that I have not equated the creeds with Scripture. What I said is that they summarize the teaching of the Bible. They are simple in the sense that they are concise summaries of what the Bible says. The point is not that all Christian churches use the creeds. It is that no Christian churches deny the major truths expressed in the creeds. Mormonism pretty much denies them all!

Rick,

That is a very misquoted and misunderstood statement of Joseph Smith's. Like a political "cut and paste" used by an enemy, I urge you to read the full quote:

"I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: 'they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.'" (Joseph Smith--History 1:19)

What was meant then, as now, what the LDS Church taught then, as it teaches now, is that the CREEDS, and those who maintain them above the Holy Scriptures were corrupt.

Not the people of Christendom. The whole earth are His sons and daughters. We are all brothers and sisters and should treat each other as such.

Look up the definition of "cult" and you will see that it applies to every religion out there if you look hard enough.

But Eric, in truth we are not alike at all, while denominations of Christianity are in agreement on the major doctrines of the Christian faith.

I appreciate your last sentence though. Though I don't see Mormonism as the fulfillment of Christianity, I see it as different from Christianity. Christianity is not Judaism and likewise, Mormonism is not Christianity.

What doctrines are "evil"?

Go on the church's official website lds.org and research the site for accuracy before you imply that their beliefs are evil.

Thank you, Christy.

Rick did seem to burst my inhibitions for about an hour (see below), but I have decided again to lay back and play with my son, while letting the mud slide by.

I truly don't understand why you would say that we are a cult and an affront to the true gospel of Christ. If you did an honest study of the teachings of the LDS Church, you would discover we are followers of Christ in the truest sense. As it says in our Articles of Faith, "If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report, or praiseworthy, we seek after these things." And we don't just say it, we live it. Please, oh please will people stop calling us a cult! It is deeply offensive.

Hey Eric,

I respect you and everyone else as being created in the image of God. However, there are significant doctrinal differences between Mormonism and historical Christianity. That is also the position taken on the LDS website. All one has to do is compare the teachings on the LDS website vs. those on the standards of some Christian church; say the Westminster Standards; which by the way are consistent with the ecumenical creeds such as the Nicene Creed and Chalcedon.

???? If Mormonism is to Christianity as Christianity is to Judaism then Mormonism is not Christianity, or perhaps you might rather say Mormonism is Christianity whereas Christianity is NOT. Judaism rejects Christianity. They sincerely believe they worship god but according to Jesus if they believed in God they would believe in him. If they do not follow him they do not follow god, or even Moses or Abraham because Moses and Abraham spoke of Jesus. If they believed Moses and Abraham they would be followers of Jesus. Again, this all indicates that Mormonism and historical Christianity proclaim two different gospels.

Amen Dan Hinmon. If a lot of these people would go to mormon.org and read everything they may very well have a more educated opinion. But I have a feeling they don't want to take the time to find out for themselves.
I know Jesus Christ is my Savior and Redeemer and I know I am a child of God put on this earth to be tryed and tested and ultimatley to have Joy. I know that what I strive to do each day can only make me, my family better and my community better. Mormons, and for that matter, NO ONE is perfect. But what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints teaches and preaches is the Perfect Gospel of Jesus Christ, found in the King James Bible. It is sometimes demanding being a member of this church but I find that when I am doing the best for my body, mind and spirit I am happier. What is the harm in that. What do we teach that is harmful to my body, mind or spirit? We get cancers, diseases, sicknesses and we have the addictive genes just like every other person. We have our struggles. We have our strengths and we have our weaknesses. Just like all of you. I am thankful for what I have and what I know. I strive to be better and I sometime fail. I rely on Jesus Christ and in his Atonement. I am thankful for all that my Savior has done for me.

Mormon missionaries are hostile? If that is your experience please report it to your local Mormon bishop (get on lds.org to find the congregation closest to you where you get contact info).

Fear of getting divorced? Come on man!!! please don't lie!!!

Catherine- great response. Best one in the lot I'd say!

Yes, I realize that you believe that. You certainly have the right to believe what you believe. What I object to is when Latter Day Saints say Christians are wrong about every major doctrine AND at the same time, Mormons are Christians!

The truth is that we believe VERY different things. I believe God speaks today through the words of his Son because that's what the Bible says. I believe no prophets are necessary today because the Bible says that too:

Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
(Ephesians 2:19-20)

You see, the church (the household of God) is built UPON the foundation! The foundation is built BEFORE the rest of house is built upon it! More prophets means building a new foundation, not the church!

Anyway, the Christian church does not accept the teaching of Joseph Smith. (I would remind you that the idea that revelation continues through prophets is also the philosophy of that one man). So while we can agree to disagree, I can't call Mormonism Christian any more than you can call Christian theology Mormon.

@Catherine. I have to get up early so this will be short. I was using the term "agency" in response to your previous post. Basically, I was using it in the sense of the ability fallen unregenerate man to do God's will. From that perspective man is dead. I was not using it from the sense of deciding what to eat or which shoes to wear. Fallen man has a corrupt nature from which he can only "walk according to the flesh" in the language of Paul. He has absolutely no ability to "walk according to the Spirit." Nonetheless, he can choose between a steak dinner and chicken.

After a person is saved they have the ability in Christ to do good works according to the regenerated, new-creation nature. This is willful obedience to God in accordance with the new nature. This is NOT philosophical determinism. Men act willfully according to their nature uncoerced by God. Fallen people cannot act in ways pleasing to God though they may do social good. Regenerated people can please God although they still can and do sin. Although they have a new nature they still struggle with the old nature until after they die. Once people are glorifed they freely obey God without the possibility of sin. They are perfected after death. Thus, ultimate free will is the ability to obey God perfectly with no possibility of sin, freely according to a perfected nature, and uncoerced by god.

The purpose of people is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.

A new nature produces good works pleasing to God.

Mark,

Let me try to un-blow it for you. It isn't that we claim we are exactly alike. Any more than ANY of the several denominations are exactly alike. We simply want, after nearly 200 years of fighting, to recognize that there is much good we can love and learn about one another. And to focus on where we are similar (Love of Christ, families) is so much the better.

Speaking of similar: Someone answered the question, "if we [the Mormons] are wrong, which of you [the Evangelicals] are right?" by telling them to pray about it. Right here on this blog. In this comments section. Wow.

P.S. - As for the whole "Are Mormons Christian?" question, I've seen my church more as related to Christianity in the same way Christianity is related to Judaism, if that helps.

My genealogy is traced back to the 1600's because of some step-mormons back in the family line. I used to think it was cool. Then as I got older I looked at it and just saw dead people. Now I don't care anymore. I'm adopted into the family of Christ and that is all that matters to me. I haven't even kept the papers that list it all.

My point is that I've seen more than a few "Good Christians" who consider themselves such because they go through all of the appropriate motions and claim to believe the creeds (et al), but whose lives absolutely fail to reflect anything even resembling Christ's guiding light.

Meanwhile, the church's policy is that a person's life should be such an obvious emblem of a person's beliefs that any sort of religious insignia should be redundant.

A man can spend all day professing to believe in the "proper" things, but what does it benefit him if his life just doesn't add up?

"The happy families are a fraud" comment is ridiculous. Of course there are miserable families in every single group of society, but there are also countless happy families too. My husband and I have been married for 22 very happy years. Of course we've had our share of trials - who doesn't? But that doesn't mean it's the fault of Mormonism. You obviously didn't pay attention to all those countless lessons about repentence and forgiveness and grace that is central to the LDS faith! It's preached every single Sunday! It's the central theme to the Bible and Book of Mormon! It sounds like you are using your own, and your friends' horrible experiences to write it all off. You cannot (should not) blame the Church for horrible trials - the Church isn't there to prevent horrible trials - it's to help you deal with it. Should Jesus have blamed Heavenly Father for his trials and walk away, calling it all a fraud? No - and you shouldn't either.

David, as a devout Mormon I want to thank you for saying something kind about my faith, in the midst of a firestorm of criticism that we have been receiving from the media. I understand you are not advocating for the doctrines of our church, but you can appreciate that it feels good to read something that isn't hostile. I respectfully disagree with the comments made by the former Latter-Day Saints who've posted responses to this article. I have lived this religion that I dearly love for 38 years, and I can tell you that I am not in any way motivated by fear. My husband is not a member of my church and yet he receives nothing but fellowship and respect from those with whom I attend church. My children are not criticized for attending sporting events that conflict with youth activity nights, and I am not criticized for having married outside the temple. I am treated so kindly and always have been. The large majority of interactions I have had in the church have been positive. Occasionally, as with any organization, I've been acquainted with people in the church who are not devoted to being Christ-like, who are critical of others, or who just don't seem interested in truly being disciples of Christ. But those are the exception and whatever religion you are, if you are converted to the tenets of your faith these interactions should not dissuade you from your beliefs. Again, I thank you for being thoughtful in your choice of words. My faith is a beautiful faith, as is yours, and I wish more people could know that.

And when I imagine how Christ would want us to debate the issue of religion, I think he would want us to choose the kind of words you've chosen. Any comments, whether by evangelicals, Mormons, Catholics, Muslims, that include meanness are not Christian.

In my experience, most of the people who try to argue for a closed canon go right to Revelation 22, completely ignoring the fact that it merely refers to Revelation rather than to the entire canon of scriptures.

In fact, these people are usually ignorant about Deuteronomy 4 having a similar injunction.

@Eric, I believe the appropriate exegesis/exposition of that verse is that all who are in Christ, that is all who belong to him, those given to him by the Father, are made alive. The verse does not teach universalism or that all men are good.

Why? Why are we even compairing? What? Is this a race to see which group gets there first?! I am a Mormon. Returned missionary and all. Very active in my faith. Female too! I have two children. I have never felt pressured to have more. (Mind you I don't live in Utah, where I feel it is a 'cultural' belief, not religious. My faith teaches me 'not to run faster than I have strenghth'. Two have kept me running hard enough.) I grew up in Canada and as a Mormon kid my parents sent us to Catholic girl school and also in high school to a very popular Evangelical boarding school. My best friends are/have been evangelicals and Catholics. Our goals are the same. We have more in common than not. Wish we'd all stop compairing ourselves to each other. "Love thy neighbour" not "Compair thyself to thy neighbour" or "Keep statistics of thy neighbour". We really are all in this together.

Sorry I can't agree with you about the Creeds being statements or summaries of what's in the bible. Sure the cover some things, but go way beyond the teachings of the bible, to the point of contradicting in others.
Just my own opinion though. I can see how you would say that Mormonism could be the philosophy of one man, if you didn't believe in Prophets and continuing revelation.
This is where the LDS teachings find their validity (or not, in your view) they teach that God has many things yet to reveal. He did not after 5000 odd years all of sudden decide that nothing else needed to be said, and no more Prophets were needed. That just doesn't make sense, nor does it agree with what has been revealed in the Bible.

I'm so tired of Latter Day Saints playing the victim. It is Joseph Smith who made the claim that God said all those who profess Christianity are corrupt.

When Christians point out the Mormonism is not Christan, THAT is not hate. It is love! Mormonism is completely "other" than Christianity and to try to blur the distinctions is completely wrong.

Actually, "As in Adam all die, so as in Christ are all men made alive." (1 Cor 15:22) So, really, every one of us in the world is good person the Lord wants back with Him.

Sorry to belabor this, but it's interesting. You've indicated previously that salvation occurs when the Holy Spirit transforms the heart. And you've indicated here that man is dead in sin and has no agency until this transformation happens.

Three questions come to mind:

a. Prior to salvation, what is a man using to make choices, if not agency? We begin making choices as children. Is that not agency?

b. If you receive agency AFTER salvation, what is the purpose of having it? For that matter, if all men are saved regardless of their works, what's the purpose of having agency at all? Why are we here, in your view?

c. What determines when the Holy Spirit makes this transformation in a person? Does the Lord decide when it's time, does the individual request it...how does that work?


I admit I've known very little about Calvinism and it's intriguing. I'm curious as to why you lean more to the Reformed Calvinism than to the Arminianism, particularly if you were an Arminian at one point? What caused the change?

This is a little bit off the subject, but in a previous post (I believe you were talking to Eric) you quoted the scripture “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’
(Matthew 7:21-23). I'm confused by this. Not the scripture, but your use of the scripture. If you take this scripture literally, then not everyone will be saved. Yet you believe everyone is saved. Can you help me understand? Doesn't the phrase "does the will of my Father" equate to good works?

Okay, NOW you may have the last word!

No Eric, Mormonism denies the truth of the creeds of Christianity. To say you are more inclusive is just not true. You just want Christians to include you, while you exclude Christian theology.

That's actually not factually correct. The Creeds are the product of extensive and complex political and theological wrangling, the result of which was more a product of political expediency than theological honesty. The power struggle between the Athanasians and the Arians is legendary. History has documented it in its minutiae. This is not up to debate. If you consider Arianism heretical, that's fine. But to declare that the Creeds are "simple statements of what the Bible says" ignores the endless arguments that endured for decades even after the Nicene creed's adoption, particularly among the Orthodox East. Until the Council of Constantinople essentially made Nicene belief the orthodox law of the land - again for reasons of political expediency - there were at least a half dozen different views on the nature of God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. And as we all know, those divisions emerged again centuries later when "The Filioque" ruptured Orthodoxy from Catholicism. So please... let's not pretend that the Creeds are beyond reproach or questioning. History does not support it. And you should know that.

Most American Evangelical churches are non-confessional (to much against the grain of the American spirit); however, if you look at the Reformed, Presbyterian, and Reformed Baptist confessions such as Westminster, Heidleberg, the Canons of Dort you will find little resemblance to Mormon theology.

Again, great work posting official LDS teachings. I must again state that these in no way disagree with the Bible. When told in the Bible, that we are Gods offspring, and created in His image, I believe that to be true. When admonished by Jesus to be perfect, even as our Father in heaven, we are expected to do our best to be, why would He ever admonish us to do something that is impossible? Through Him, we can eventually become perfect.

Can't see any issues here?

So, the Christian church has been apostate since the last of the apostles died in the first century until Joseph Smith brought about the restoration in the 19th century. It still blows my mind how and why Mormons want to claim they do not differ in doctrine from Evangelical churches that they believe are apostate.

Actually, Mormonism is the philosophy of just one man, mingled with scripture, and placed above the Bible.

The Creeds are simple statements (summaries) of what the Bible says. Would you also say that Gospel Principles is the philosophy of men, mingled with scripture?

So, if Mormonism and Christianity differ on the personality of Christ, then "Houston we've got a problem." The starting point of Christianity is the Trinity which is inextricably related to the personality of Christ. The differing doctrines of God and Christ are incompatible. Furthermore these doctrines affect just about every other biblical doctrine; i.e., the nature of humankind, revelation, scripture, creation and on and on.

Who closed the canon? I think you wont find any evidence that it was God or Jesus Christ. If it is closed, then it has been closed by man.

Thanks for posting the official LDS beliefs.

To the best of my knowledge, The Apostles, Nicene and Chalcedonian creeds are the philosophies of men, Mingled with scripture. The best the groups with differing opinions could come up with at the time. Should they be regarded as scripture? Is that what Christianity should be based on?
I believe that the Nicene Creed does not agree with what is taught in the bible, in relation to the nature of God.
I also believe the starting point of Christianity, to be when man first came to the earth, not when a group of arguing sects, got together to define what God was?
A comparison to what the LDS church teaches and what is actually in the Bible, removes most differences. Any differences that remain, enhance and clarify, rather than remove what is taught in the Bible.

Of course not, but then the definition Mormons use is more inclusive than the one Evangelicals use.

Which is part of the problem. It is as if both parties sat down in front of a dictionary, opened it to "Christianity," and while one wanted to use all four definitions listed (have no idea, just pulling a number) the other wanted to stick with only the fourth.

Until we are clear with that in each other these conversations go nowhere.

Christianity has a closed canon. The ecumenical creeds that Mormonism rejects are but summaries of biblical doctrine. Mormonism has an open canon and considers several books besides the Bible to be revelation from God. So, in addition to differing on the doctrine of God, the doctrine of man, Christ, there are also differences in the doctrines of revelation, scripture.

I'll answer:

There is only one God that we worship. That's the answer. If you read carefully, that's all Jesus (or Moses) says, either.

No, we don't believe in the traditional trinity. But neither does Paul, the Eastern Orthodox, or Coptic Church, and they are considered Christian, are they not?

Nobody knows where God lives. Anymore than anyone knows exactly how long a day is for Him--or are you holding Him to the 1000 year example? Both it and Kolob are meant as examples of "way beyond YOU," nothing more.

Nobody knows where God came from. Are you saying you do? Your question is meant to be loaded with the speculation of past prophets of our Church--tell me, are you being held to the musings of everything every Church Father ever said?

Jesus is The Only Begotten. He was with the Father in the beginning. C'mon, that is in Genesis. "Let us make man in our image."

Of course Jesus is unique. But again, you are asking that in a loaded way, looking for the Mormon perspective, so I will say it: He is as far above you and I as a 30-year old man is from a newborn child, and infinitely more so. But that man and that child are of the same species, and so are we. (Romans 8:16)

We do NOT teach that Jesus was married. There is no evidence for that. I defy you to give me a single Bible, Book of Mormon, D&C, or Pearl of Great Price reference for such a thing.

Yes God the Father has other sons. You are one of them. But again you are asking a different, more loaded question. Are there other Saviors out there? No. Only in and through Christ can we be saved. Both the Bible and the Book of Mormon teach that. In fact, the Doctrine & Covenants teaches that Jesus saved not only the inhabitants of this world, but every world God the Father created (D&C 76:22-24, note the use of the word "worlds"). So in a sense we believe that the Savior's atonement is even more encompassing than most other churches. We also, defacto, believe in extra-terrestrial life. Wrap your mind around that.

We do believe we "have a Mother there." No denying it. But her nature or character is as mysterious as God's address. We don't speak of her, out of respect, because He does not.

Ah, the "can humans really become gods??????" loaded gun. News flash, as His literal son, you already are. Admittedly in the nearly-embryo phase. But we are all his "offspring" (Romans 8:16, again) and entitled to the "divine nature." (2 Peter 1:3, Revelations 3:21) That was the whole purpose of Christ extending His Grace and making His Atonement. Not to make up for an accident of Adam, but as part of a plan to help us grow into what God wants us to be.

Immozilla, I don't doubt that your belief is sincere. Nor do I doubt that you believe what you said. However, what you believe is different than what Christians believe.

Mormonism uses similar language to mean very different things. For instance, the LDS "Godhead" is made up of 3 Gods. The Christian Godhead is one God in three persons. Christianity is monotheistic and Mormonism is henotheistic.

You see, Jesus is not "part" of the Godhead.

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

Yes, I have read the BoM. I've read the other LDS scriptures as well. They are not the Word of God. The BoM lacks any real historical support, but it is also not a book of LDS theology. D&C and PGP are the real doctrinal books and they conflict with what God has already said.

I imagine you believe the Bible is corrupt and that there was a great apostasy. These things are not historically accurate. But if you believe that, you once again prove my point because Christianity accepts only the Bible as the written Word of God.

As to who you worship, I am assuming only because I have never met a Latter Day Saint who worships Jesus exactly the same as the Father. If you do, I stand corrected, but I believe you would be outside of LDS theology to do that.

[...] « Previous  |Home|           Southern (and Mormon) Hospitality Wednesday, August 22, 2012, 10:17 PM Katherine Infantine Last Friday, in my blog post Are the Mormons on to Something? I linked to a Gospel Coalition article on why Mormons are beating evangelicals in church growth. [...]

Mormonism teaches that God has a physical body and that man is or can become divine. Both the Mormon doctrine of God and the doctrine of man are in conflict with Christianity.

From the LDS website:

God the Father is the Supreme Being in whom we believe and whom we worship. He is the ultimate Creator, Ruler, and Preserver of all things. He is perfect, has all power, and knows all things. He “has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's” (D&C 130:22).

The Father of Our Spirits

One of life's great questions is “Who am I?” A beloved Primary song helps even little children answer this question. We sing, “I am a child of God, and he has sent me here.” The knowledge that we are children of God provides strength, comfort, and hope.

We are all literally children of God, spiritually begotten in the premortal life. As His children, we can be assured that we have divine, eternal potential and that He will help us in our sincere efforts to reach that potential.

Because being saved by grace and realizing that you are a morally wretched human being that can only have a relationship with the One True God through the blood on the cross and not through any thing "good" that you do yourself is offensive?
That would be the cornerstone that the Jews could not get over either. Sorry if you find my "outburst" offensive. It's the truth.

The Trinity, 3 persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit one in being is central to Christianity which holds to the doctrines of God and Christ laid out in the Apostle's Creed, The Nicene Creed, and the Calcedonian definition concerning the person and natures of Christ. Since the starting point of Christian theology is the nature of God differences on this doctrine are going to affect one's entire theology. Below is from the LDS site concerning the doctrine of God and there's nothing in common there. According to this statement the Christian church is apostate and I do not understand why Mormons are so set on trying to convince apostates they hold the same beliefs.

From the LDS webpage:

The true doctrine of the Godhead was lost in the apostasy that followed the Savior's mortal ministry and the deaths of His Apostles. This doctrine began to be restored when 14-year-old Joseph Smith received his First Vision (see Joseph Smith—History 1:17). From the Prophet's account of the First Vision and from his other teachings, we know that the members of the Godhead are three separate beings. The Father and the Son have tangible bodies of flesh and bones, and the Holy Ghost is a personage of spirit (see D&C 130:22).

Although the members of the Godhead are distinct beings with distinct roles, they are one in purpose and doctrine. They are perfectly united in bringing to pass Heavenly Father's divine plan of salvation.

Very interesting article and discussion. As a divorced member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints I can tell you that the only thing that preserved my sanity was the peace, inspiration and deep love that I felt through the grace of Christ. I came to understand the Savior in a way I had never known before. I am so grateful that he suffered and died for me.
I concur with the Book of Mormon prophet who wrote: "And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins." (2 Nephi 25:26)
Now, 20 years later, I am blessed with an amazing wife who joins me in service in our churches and our temple, not out of guilt or to accumulate works, but in deep gratitude for all that Christ has blessed us with. He has lifted me beyond what I could ever ever do myself. I know he is my Lord and Savior.

What our non-LDS brothers and sisters need to realize is that "lower levels of heaven" do not equal higher levels of hell. And that we are just as likely to end up in those "lower levels" as they are to end up in the highest. The doors are wide open to everyone. The only stumbling blocks are ourselves, with God's grace.

Well that makes no sense since the creeds testify of Jesus! The creeds are all about who Jesus is and what he's done. If you believe the creeds, you believe in Jesus!

So do you only consider Christians to be those who deny the Creeds?

Tom, I commend you for being a good Christian soldier. However, your rationale for fewer divorces is also based on fear and guilt, both of which are terrible motivators and rarely last for long without destroying lives. How about a simpler, more believable reason -- the LDS church teaches that marriage is ordained of God and goes to great lengths to help people strengthen their families, and therefore a marriage has more help to succeed??

I'm not "driven by works", I'm motivated by my faith in Christ and knowledge that I am a child of God. Please don't tell others what motivates them just because you disagree with their doctrine. Just follow Jesus' simple test for everything - "By their fruits ye shall know them." It's a pretty amazing leap of credulity to suggest that a religion based on something fundamentally sinister would produce good people and strong marriages and communities. Follow Jesus' test -- if it makes good fruit, it is a good tree. And we are all in this together, it's not Christian vs. Christian, it is God's followers vs. those who want to remove God from our society. We must work together to strengthen all families, not just those within our own doctrinal circle.

I have researched it and did you seriously give me a chat page as a reference to your organization's position on life?

Do not tell me that I cannot judge what is murder. Especially since you seriously judged me for stating something that is true. Both Harry Reid and Mitt Romney have been and are still pro-abortion. Even making the exception for rape and incest denies the existence of a life created by God.

James 2:14-18

So if you had someone who didn't actually believe in Jesus per se but who believed in the creeds, would you still be willing to consider them a Christian?

Aka: Who let all this Mormon riff raff in the room!!!!!! =)

Muslims believe in Christ. Jehovah's Witnesses do too. Neither are Christian. The Creeds of Christianity are simply statements of Biblical truth. To say that the creeds are corrupt is to say Christianity is corrupt. When you argue against the creeds you just prove my point.

So basically, what you're saying is "The kingdom of God can only advance by pretending that anyone who disagrees with us doesn't exist"?

Beat? There's no competition. Christ's church reigns victorious and he sovereignly rules over creation for the benefit of his church and those who love him. He sealed the deal 2,000 years ago at Pentecost by sending His Holy Spirit.

David, I appreciate your thoughts. However, it is possible that your opinion on "guilt" being a primary motivator for LDS people to be actively involved in the church is more of a comment on your experience than anyone else's experience. Guilt is a terrible motivator and almost never lasts long-term -- and as you describe yourself as a former member, apparently guilt as your motivator didn't last long either. That has never been a significant motivator in either my life or my church experience, rather the personal experience of seeing that living God's commandments brings a better and happier life, not guilt. The guilt charge just plays into the hands of the deluded secularists who believe the false philosophy that it's better to "laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints". My experience has been that by a huge margin, the saints spend more time with smiles on their faces than the sinners, and the true saints (who are not perfect) spend their effort trying to help those who are caught in the misery of sin. So please don't continue to pluck the out-of-tune string that people only stay in the Mormon church out of guilt. Guilt is only truly effective when people recognize that their actions are in conflict with God's plan for them.

When we Mormons say that we're Christian, we mean that we believe in Christ.

For someone to presume that "Christian = creeds" says more about the someone than about Christianity.

Sorry my mistake.
I understood the Jesus revealed in the Bible to be the Son of God, the only begotten of the the Father in the flesh, distinct and separate, as found in the Bible and as He himself testified of.
I believe that salvation only comes through the atonement the Savior Jesus Christ, and our witnessing our faith in Him, as revealed in the Bible.
I believe that man is created in the image of God, as found in the bible.
I believe that we are all spirit children of God (His offspring), as found in the Bible.
I believe Jesus Christ to be part of the Godhead and one with the Father, in purpose, as found in the Bible.
I believe God the Father to be greater than Jesus Christ (as much as that may be possible, as perfect as Jesus is), as found in the Bible.

(Happy to provide references for the above if required, but it was not my intention to bash, and you probably have a better recall of scripture than I, so no doubt you can find them)

Just in case you were wondering, I am a "Mormon", and this is what I truly believe. I just want you to know that I am genuine in my belief and trying to model my life after Jesus Christ (as he instructed all to do), to the best of my ability, as guided by the Holy Spirit. You are welcome to disagree with my beliefs.
It is also, to the best of my knowledge, what is taught by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

Please don't assume to know whom I may worship or how I worship Jesus Christ, or God the Father.
Have you read the Book of Mormon? (serious Question, if not that's ok by me, but I can't see how you could state that the Scriptures (I assume you mean the Bible when you say this) and the books of Mormonism have almost nothing in common.
It would seem to me you haven't (assumption), as from my experience, the Book of Mormon only confirms, clarifies and enhances what is taught in the Bible.

Ultimately, I have had so many witnesses to the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as taught by the Church of Jesus Christ, to ever be able to deny it. No matter what one may say, cannot change the truth of these spiritual witnesses. Jesus is the Christ. He lives, and wants us to follow Him. Through Him, I receive strength, solace and Grace. If believing that makes me lost and wrong, I don't want to be found or right.

God Bless

Eric, as another person who never comments, I had to say thank you for breaking your habit and commenting here. So thankful that I am happy in my church and happy for others in theirs. And thankful I don't feel the need to bash others' beliefs.

That is not true. To say that because they are organized and large now that they are no longer a cult is a silly definition not holding to the reality of a group growing. Even Jim Jones was organized though the definition of small would be a debatable point. They follow Thomas Monson as their living prophet.

You are taking a very narrow small definition of the sociological perspective. Which really doesn't matter since it is the Christian definition that matters.

I think the only points of doctrine where we would differ is in the nature of the personality and individuality of Jesus. For while it may be very hard for the evangelical accept when we say it emphatically, Christ may be separate from His Father, but He is Truly and Personally our God and Savior.

The rest of the doctrines you outlined would have no quarrels in a Mormon Sunday School. Really. I can assure you of that as an LDS Sunday School teacher.

Our last and only remaining point of departure is precisely who and how many souls The Father hath given Christ. Which we see as a great deal more, I guess, than the average evangelical. I highly recommend to you the book, "How Wide The Divide? A Mormon and An Evangelical in Conversation."

As I noted above, though, the more "Good Christians" who indulge in this kind of hate, the more people we get as investigators.

If you guys are truly serious about beating us, the first thing you need to do is get your own spiritual houses in order.

Otherwise, we'll keep recruiting from among those who your fellows offend with their hatred and misconduct.

Some of the worst people I've ever known were "saved" Christians who felt that their salvation gave them free reign to do as they pleased.

Their mentality was "I'm already saved, so no matter what I do I'm good!".

I actually once saw an ordained minister declare that "husband-on-wife spousal abuse" was justified if it meant keeping women from becoming Mormon.

That's how bad it is.

In fact, a lot of the people that we Mormons get as converts are people who *did* become disenchanted with mainline Christianity because of such gross misconduct on the part of people who profess to be "saved".

So if you guys are truly serious about beating Mormonism, the first thing you need to do is get your own spiritual houses in order. As long as you've got "I'm saved, so I'm going to Heaven regardless!" people in your ranks, we'll keep winning.

People have done and will continue to do great evil in the name of God.

The religious rulers of Jesus day crucified him in the name of God. Jesus warned his disciples that men will kill them in the name of God.

I'd seriously question the Christianity of those who do violance toward others in the name of Christ. The church is made up of both wheat and weeds and this will be so until Christ returns again to separate them.

You need to sit back and read some of the posts.

You see, a lot of the critics of the LDS faith never did their own research; instead, they relied on whatever their minister or another "authority figure" spoon-fed them.

As a result of this, a lot of the arguments floating around about the church are false; some are considerably out-of-date, while others are just flat lies someone made up to attack us.

Like I said - there are still people who think that we have horns.

Congratulations - your outburst probably just got us a dozen new investigators at least.

@Catherine. Thanks for the conversation.

Among evangelical churches there are basically 2 views with respect to human agency. What I have been presenting is Reformed/Calvinism. That view is that man is ABSOLUTELY DEAD in sin and the HS must give life before free agency comes in which it does. The other view is Arminianism. Arminians I've known, and as I used to be, usually also believe that man is dead in sin. However, they have a different understanding in that they give primacy to human choice. People can chose to be saved and once saved to choose to be unsaved. Christ call to repentence is indiscriminate and it's up to people to choose. To me Arminianism panders to human autonomy and our American individualism. The primacy of choice even justifies murder of the unborn in the American mind. It is the natural fleshly tendancy of the human heart. It also seems to be the 1 work that saves. There is also semi-Pelagianism which recognizes grace plus works (or justification involves human works in part) and Pelagianism which believes it is entirely within man's power to save himself.

Jacobus Arminius (his Latinized name) was a Dutch theolgian from the Protestant reformation in the 16th century. You may sometime hear of "the 5 points of Calvinism" or TULIP. These were 5 positions of the Reformed in the Canons of Dort stated against the views of Arminius.

The building where I attend services at has been vandalized, entered, and even *desecrated* so often that the cops are on speed-dial.

I myself have received threats of physical violence.

So yes, there *are* mainline Christians who wish us Mormons harm.

I would say in response to your sneering rejection of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

34 Then stood there up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation among all the people, and commanded to put the apostles forth a little space;
35 And said unto them, Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what ye intend to do as touching these men.
36 For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought.
37 After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.
38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:
39 But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.
(New Testament KJV, Acts, Chapter 5)

But, the gospel of grace is that the divine Son of God, 2nd person of the trinity, sent by the Father (a person), assumed a human nature (i.e., became incarnate) lived, died, and rose again, thus taking to himself the infinite wrath of God (there is only one God) and becoming the righteousness for all those whom the Father has given him. He (that is the glorified Jesus, the God-man) is now seated at the right hand of the Father interceding and helping by the Holy Spirit (a person) all those the Father has given him. The glorified Jesus is worthy of all honor, praise and worship. Only those who honor him and belong to him know the Father (God) and are his.

Zachary
We don't condemn anyone to Hell, but God does. Jesus also taught that.
I haven't read every entry written here, but it seems like you are equating telling someone the full message of Christ (that we are condemned apart from trusting in his righteousness alone) is "hate."

Because they are working their way to heaven. Peer pressure is enormous. None of it is from the joy of the Holy Spirit.

Perhaps we need more pastors telling us how selfish and self centered we are instead of trying to make us feel good about our selves so that they can "increase" their numbers for the balance sheet.

And I know for a fact that not every church is how you say and so that makes what you say a generalization and basically a lie.

Maybe there are Christians on here who "hate" Mormons, I do not really know. If that's really so they need to repent. However, it is not hateful to believe that Mormonism is a false gospel and to say so. In fact it is the responsibility of Christians to be discerning and to follow no other gospel than that taught by Christ, the apostles and the prophets. That's just the plain teaching of the Bible; both Jesus and Paul, etc. There is a true gospel which is to be distinguished from the false. It is not even the task of Christians to make everyone believe as they do. In fact they cannot. That is a work of the Holy Spirit. However, Christians do have a responsibility to proclaim and defend the truth once delivered to the saints; i.e. the apostolic word/gospel of the kingdom. Christianity and the gospel are exclusive, not egalitarian with which Americans are so much more comfortable. It is not hateful to warn someone they need to get out of a burning building because they don't believe it's on fire.

If I hear this one more time I swear my ears are going to bleed. There is no such thing!!

I'm not good. You are not good. Mormons are certainly not good. THERE IS NO SUCH THING as good people. That is the lie that everyone keeps telling to keep what Christ has done for us on the cross from being known.

Saved by grace because of the work on the cross. Not the prayers said in the garden and then you work real hard on being good to prove your worth so that you can be like God.

Every time someone like you says that, you deny what Jesus did for all of us, including them. I don't care who you are disgusted with. Address what they said but DO NOT lessen what Christ did for us on the cross.

SeminaryWife,

I don't know how you could miss it living in a 70 % LDS community, but I want you to know that in the end we know we are totally dependent on the grace of God, too. Not only from the Bible, which is the #1 of our canon, but from Book of Mormon scripture which reminds us to look to Christ because no matter what, "after all we can do," it is by grace we are saved. (2 Nephi 25:23)

And our view of heaven (a much better way to say it than "our heaven," don't you think? After all heaven belongs to God) is definitely focused on God, not ourselves. We will be overjoyed to have our families there--because what is heaven without them--but the greatest joy is knowing The Father's House has so many mansions that really the ONLY souls Christ won't ultimately redeem are the devil and his angels. (Revelations 7:9, 20:10)(Doctrine & Covenants 76:39-43) The D&C is also part of our canon, I know it is not what you believe, but it will help you understand more correctly what we believe.

THAT is the Gospel of Jesus Christ that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints preaches!

Im sorry that you have witnessed such tragic events .. As you know, nobody is perfect including Mormons. Judgement is a real thing,as this is what has led to this forum. Everybody has good and bad experiences in life and in the church. Its how you deal with them that makes you the person you are. My daughter is living with her boyfriend and we visit her regularly. In fact, we helped moved their furniture and cleaned the house they left. Tomorrow Im taking her shopping for their new place. Her boyfriend made me the best Mothers Day breakfast. While we may not agree with the choices they make, we still love them to bits!! For us, our love cannot be conditional, why we would be the biggest hypocrites.
We make mistakes all the time, as parents, we are still learning. Cant imagine Heavenly Father giving up on us. Please don't be so hard on the church or its members, because we do try our best.
If you have had a bad experience as a member, thats fine. Move on, but please don't flog a dead horse, cos its not gonna get up...

So much hate here over a faith of good people, so much bitterness and downright horrible attitudes. When has the Mormon faith ever publicly attacked another’s faith? When do they teach at great length anti-(insert religion?) They teach love, respect, and tolerance in fact one of our articles of faith teaches ( I’m paraphrasing) to allow everyone to warship the way they want to and in turn allow us to worship the way we want to. We grow because we don’t hate on others and condemn them to an eternity in HELL for not believing the way we do…wow lovely sentiment really. We teach that all people, regardless of their faith are very important to Heavenly Father, that we are ALL brothers and sisters, and in turn we will all receive his rest and peace in the end; (EVERYONE) Muslims, Jews, Protestants, Catholics, Buddhists, Atheist, Agnostic, etc. Will recognize Christ and confess he is the savior of mankind…we never use fear to motivate our people NEVER...fear is the opposite of faith, oil and water they do not mix well. Christ teaches peace, love, charity, kindness, and forgiveness he never used fear tactics to keep his people with him, always a choice. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a good organization full of good people (not perfect) but good people.

Sorry that is simply not true. The Jesus revealed in the Bible is God. Not a lesser god, but the only true God who took on flesh. Christians worship him exactly as we worship the Father.

I have searched the scriptures and read the books of Mormonism and they have almost nothing in common. Mormons have a different God, a different Jesus, a different Holy Spirit and a completely different concept of salvation. The teachings of Joseph Smith are in direct opposition to Christian theology and the words God had already spoken in his Word.

Sorry Rick,

I usually quietly sit and read these kinds of articles, then thumb through the comments just to see what everyone is fighting about, but without saying anything. But I have to speak up here. I have no reason to doubt your story, but I can doubt the man who told it to you, for reasons stated earlier about Ex-Mormons and their axes.

On our missions, two-hours of DAILY scripture study was MANDITORY. That's at least an hour with the Bible, and it doesn't mention the weekly and monthly training with leadership, or even consider the four years spent in High School previously enrolled in Seminary courses to prepare--two of those dedicated to, yep, the KJV Bible.

Of course there will always be levels of competence. Some of my mission partners felt like they were still only good at the memorized passages, while I would often find myself enjoying too much a good street corner "Bible Bash" and need to reel myself in. (Though once on my mission, I went toe to toe with a radio evangelical call-in show.) There was a recent Pew study that found Mormon youth to be the MOST familiar with the Bible, not the least. You can look it up yourself.

The point is, IF the experience of that missionary "from China" is true (BTW, the LDS Church has a temple in Hong Kong but does NOT send foreign missionaries to China, so I'm thinking it is not) it was his experience alone, one that does not sound like the experience of someone who just dedicated two years of their life to a cause, and it is NOT typical or exemplary of LDS Bible knowledge.

Mr. French, thank you for this article very good read. Thank you for the kindness you have shown to my faith. 6 mom spot on sister!!! haha just don’t get into a verbal debate with these guys they are trained to attack and in the end hard feelings are present and the devil is the victor! :)

Zach

Actually, "door-to-door evangelism" is regarded as something of a last resort these days, only taken to when the missionaries don't have referrals or appointments already in place.

Most missionary work that takes place these days takes place between individuals.

Maybe you have a different bible than mine? Answered truthfully, these questions reveal that the Jesus Christ (there is only one) the Latter-Day Saints believe in, corresponds exactly to what is found in Bible teachings. But don't take my word for it (not likely, I know), there is plenty of evidence to back that up if you care to search the scriptures, ponder them, and then pray for that witness that only comes from God, through the Holy Spirit.

You see, a lot of mainline Christians have the notion that *their* version of Christianity is right and that everyone else is going to hell.

Because of this, they only care about people of other faiths in the sense of "converting them to *my* beliefs".

Reaching out to a Jesus other than the Biblical one, though.

These are GREAT questions. Answered truthfully, they reveal that the Mormon Jesus is nothing at all like the hisorical, Biblical, Christian Jesus.

I am an active Mormon (LDS) woman in a local church leadership position. My husband and I regularly visit people who are not active in the LDS church. Many welcome the visits. Some have joined other churches yet still want their name on the LDS rolls. Some say they want thier names removed and don't want contact. At that point, we explain the process for having your name removed. Very few people do it and so they remain on the rolls of the church... and we will continue to have contact with them in hopes that they may someday choose to return to the fold.
There was a process to join the church through baptism by immersion. A commitment is made. An interview is conducted to be sure the person is informed of what being baptized means and the covenents they are making. The actual baptismal service takes at least an hour not to mention planning time, filling the font, washing the clothing etc. Some did so as 8 year old children who grew up in the church, others as adults who were taught by missionaries.
There is a process to leave the church. It is much less complicated.
1st) Send a hand signed letter or postcard asking for your name to be removed. Include your name and address and send it to the local bishop. (Texting and email does not work because it is not signed.)
2) You will be contacted ONCE to confirm you wish your name to be removed.
3) A brief meeting of the bishopric (lay leaders) will be held that you will be invited to but do not have to attend and your name will be removed. Done.
The removal process takes less than 5 minutes of a person's time.

I appreciate the kindness of your article. I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints also known as a "Mormon". I never cease to be amazed at the hate and meanness that people spew at "Mormons" as evidenced by a lot of the responses given to your article. We do not spend our time knocking other religions. If people want to join our church "great", if not, that's okay too. It's called Freedom of Religion. Try reading Mark 12 verses 30 and 31. That's what "Christianity" is about, loving your neighbor, not judging them and hating them for their choices. Maybe your readers should practice a little more of what they preach.

John, If you look in the scriptures you will see that following the commandments are vital to our salvation. You will see that those who do not honor the commandments will not be with God. This you will see as you read through the scriptures. Read James 2. I do recognize that without Jesus taking our sins and dying no amount of faith or works would be of any use. It is through him that we have life. We need faith but the works also help us become like our Savior.

Actually, the church makes it a point to go through the *front* door whenever they want to expand their efforts anywhere; this means that it works with the governments of whatever place they want to set up shop in.

The results have been quite bountiful.

For example, while some churches were worrying about how many Bibles they could smuggle across the border into the USSR, we got a temple built in East Germany (Freiberg, 1985) and had a congregation meeting in Moscow.

Look at it this way -

Why do Mormons get people to volunteer for positions that other churches have to pay people to take?

Answer that question, and you'll see what people have been getting at.

A little different when Jesus Christ judges, as opposed to you or I don't cha think? I may be mistaken, but I kinda think he has the right to do so??

There are a few things I disagree with in our statements but will only cover one. That is the fear thing. I joined the church with my mum when I was 13 so have seen both sides. I think that it is not fear that keeps marriages together but an eternal perspective in looking at the relationship. I know that my marriage is forever so I look for ways to keep it that way rather than cutting and running at the first sign of a problem. There is a greater reward, if you will, for remaining together and working things our. I have heard non church going people use the fear argument for people going to church, any church, but it really doesn't work because most people are looking forward with joy to being with God. So fear isn't the guiding principle but the end result of how we live our lives.

@Melody: your comment "This "moral" organization does not have a pro-life stand" seems to be either disingenuous or ignorant. It does not take much searching to discover that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, views abortion with the same seriousness of taking a life. A quick search on http://mormon.org/searchresults?query=abortion will reveal this.

Again, "Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

Mark, Your comments have been interesting to me. I enjoy religion and particularly religious discussion, as I grew up in a home with a father who encouraged this type of thinking among us. I would love to continue the discussion but I realize it doesn't really have a conclusion and I need to turn my attention to other things now. But I wanted to respond to your comment and then I'll give you the last word.

It sounds to me as though what you're describing as salvation is something that happens TO you and does not involve a person's will. That philosophy does indeed go against Mormon theology. We believe we were deliberately put here on earth as agents, not only for the purpose of experiencing an environment where real growth could occur and faith could be exercised, but also to use our agency to choose good or evil. To Latter-Day Saints, agency is an imperative part of God's plan for us. We ultimately return to him because we choose righteousness over evil, and the Savior enables us to do this even though we are not perfect. Salvation is not a singular event that happens in a moment and then what we do after that is irrelevant. It is something (in my belief) that we strive for through our obedience to God's commandments, and our willingness to accept the blessings of the Atonement. It almost sounds like it's an issue of timing. You believe that once it happens, it happens and the things that follow are evidence that it happened. We believe that salvation doesn't happen until after this life, when we will be judged and the Lord determines that we accepted his Atonement by repenting and trying to follow him (thereby being cleansed by the Holy Spirit).

The doctrine of salvation is one that can be interpreted differently (to a degree), and my specific take on it is a result of my own understanding of the Bible, and clarifications made by the additional scriptures which we espouse, in addition to the teachings of what we believe to be a living prophet. (Please forgive the run-on sentence.) Because you do not believe in living prophets or in scripture outside of the Bible (that's a discussion for another day), I don't expect you to give credence to those things. But I have had a legitimate witness of their truthfulness, and they have helped shape my beliefs about salvation and our eventual return to the Father.

Thank you for enlightening me with your thoughts, and for being considerate of mine. I will re-read this discussion to learn what I can about your religion, and I applaud you for being firm in your faith.

Thanks for the chat.

Well since I am unable to reply to a comment directed to me above by Eric, I will post it here.

I mentioned that it was Joseph Smith who made the claim that God said all those who profess Christianity are corrupt. He said exactly this, but I was told this is often "misquoted and misunderstood".

So Eric said it was "the CREEDS, and those who maintain them above the Holy Scriptures were corrupt."

But what you fail to see Eric is that the Christian Church still holds to the truth of those creeds! As a Christian I testify to you that the Creeds of the Christian Church are Biblical statements and are therefore still true! Therefore, even if I accept your spin of what Smith said you MUST think I and my brothers and sisters in Christ are corrupt or our beliefs are corrupt!

So if Mormons think that Christianity is corrupted by the creeds, and if Christianity accepts the truth of the creeds, why do Mormons try to convince people they are Christian? This is disingenuous at best.

The sheer number of LDS posting here show their desperation to appear Christian. This makes no sense. It is what makes Mormonism a cult of Christianity. As long as you continue to try to be considered Christian and yet deny every major doctrine of Christianity, Mormonism will always remain a cult of Christianity.

While there are many members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints that are inactive, it is my experience that most of those do not want their names removed from the records. Most of them (not all) still believe it to be the true church. It is not that difficult to get your name removed from the records of the church if you so desire. Although I do not recommend it, all you need to do is go and talk with your bishop, and he will discuss with you how to go about it. It is not a difficult process. I have to admit that I am surprised by the number of seemingly judgmental, negative slants by so many professing to be followers of Christ, towards those trying their best to live according to their conscience and the dictates of their hearts. Should we not let all, share what we believe to be true, then respectfully let all worship how, when and where they may? Judge not lest ye be judged. Let God judge between me and thee.

Let me try this again:
Reading through these comments, half of them seem to be of the "there are many ways to God" variety, you know, as if Mormonism and Christianity are not that far apart. About 25% of the others are Mormons using this articles subject (paraphrased as 'look how much the Mormons have to teach us') as an opportunity for Mormon evangelism.
How is this advancing the Kingdom of God? Does TGC think about this before allowing such articles?

I just wanted to share some resources for those interested and then I think I'm done with this comment thread. ;)

As far as what it truly means to be "born again", John Piper wrote a great book entitled, "Finally Alive." You can download a pdf version for free from here:

http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/books/finally-alive

Another great book that helps explain the gospel is John MacArthur's, "The Gospel According to Jesus." I think this would be especially interesting to those from the LDS church who are concerned (and rightly so!) about those who say they are "saved" yet live lives that don't yield fruit in keeping with that profession.

http://www.amazon.com/Gospel-According-Jesus-Authentic-Faith/dp/0310287294/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1345673277&sr=1-1&keywords=the+gospel+according+to+jesus

And as far as the commentor who asked how to know which church to attend (I don't know if you were serious but I'll move forward as though you were)...you must become a diligent student of the Bible, earnestly pray for the Spirit to give you discernment to understand and faithfully apply it to your life and pray that the Lord will guide you to faithful friends/authors/teachers/preachers of that Word. The more you do this and sincerely open your heart before Him with a desire to know and follow His Word, the easier it will be to discern truth from error (Hebrews 5:14).

Then you will need to do your research of the churches in your area (reading websites thoroughly, visiting to hear the foundation/focus of the preaching, etc.) and find one that is faithfully standing on and teaching the whole counsel of God (the entire Bible). I suspect this will continue to become more and more difficult to find as the days grow darker...but they are still out there. We found one...thank the Lord!!!

The 9Marks ministry was extremely helpful to us during this process:

http://www.9marks.org/

Praying for all of you who have been a part of this discussion!

I'm glad you call us Mormons friends. Nice article.

Fred,

Can I ask you a bit more about some of your beliefs, about God in particular:

Do you believe there is only one God?
Do you believe in the Trinity - the one God is three persons, equal yet distinct, each fully God?
Where do you believe God lives?
Where do you believe God came from?
Where do you believe Jesus (God the Son) came from?
When did God the Son come into existence?
Do you believe that Jesus is unique?
Do you believe that Jesus was married? If so, to how many wives?
Do you believe that God the father has other sons?
Do you believe that God the father has a wife or wives?
Do you believe that humans can become God or gods?

Sorry to ask so many questions but I'm concerned that you may use these terms to mean something different to what non-mormons understand them to mean.

Thanks

Ian

Here's how it works.

For the first year or so of a person's existence, they sit with their parents in all of their meetings.

Once they're old enough (about 18 months), they spend a year or so in nursery, where they get basic lessons in human interaction mixed with basic scripture stories.

From about 3 or 4 to the age of 11, a child is in Primary. Individual classes teach a mixture of scripture stories, church history, and basic theology; combined meetings with multiple classes are where further instruction on civility and human interactions are taught.

At 12, a major change happens. From here on out, a person begins attending regular Sunday School. The first hour is spent on theology. The church gives an entire year each to the Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine & Covenants / church history, thereby encouraging in-depth study; members are grouped in age-appropriate categories through to adulthood, in which all sit together. The second hour is spent with the men going to priesthood (where they learn a mix of civics, theology, and how to run a congregation) and the women going to the Relief Society (where they learn a mix of civics, theology, and how to conduct the church's charitable functions).

High school students are encouraged (obligated if they wish to attend BYU) "seminary" classes during the school week in addition to regular church. Seminary follows the same year-long cycle, but with a focus on providing a different POV on issues so as to encourage further study.

This system of going through the scriptures cover-to-cover every four years *and* teaching church history means that one can reasonably expect the average adult member of the church to be somewhat well-versed in the church's theology and history; it's a large part of why we score so much higher on basic-knowledge tests than other denominations.

From there, we have a class for adult investigators and new converts (49 lessons covering a whole slew of topics), and additional Sunday School classes can be authorized as needed to meet various needs from among the membership of each congregation.

Mondays are set aside for Family Home Evening, in which families are to get together and study. Wednesdays are marked off for youth and young adult activities to further strengthen the community. Fridays and Saturdays often see activities as well, based on what the local congregations have going.

*This* is how we so successfully reach the youth.

If you get the chance, I'd recommend looking up George Orwell's "Politics and the English Language."

As Orwell notes out, society has become so acclimated to buzzwords that simply hearing / seeing a label can cause a person to create certain mental blocks concerning something.

What you're seeing is an example of his thesis in action: people try to label us as a "cult" so that they can scare others away without actually having to try to argue why we're wrong and/or they're right.

First off, you need to actually establish that it's the "truth" and not just your own opinion.

No doubt Jesus would go to the Only Perfect Church (OPC), or sometimes referred to as the Orthodox Presbyterian Chruch. ;)

So if Mormonism teaches "false" doctrine, what church should I go to this week to start learning "true" doctrine? Which of your religions can save my soul?
Many of you agree on what church I shouldn't go to, now tell me exactly what church I should go to!

1. Women can be divorced from a man. Even what is called a temple annulment and can then be sealed/married to another man. I agree though divorce should be the last resort. Counseling is pretty effective.

2. If you read canon (Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine in Covenants, Pearl of Great Price) the last four are LDS scripture. You find the Lord repeatedly states that he gives truths when his children are ready for them. Line upon Line, Percept upon Percept.

3. Totally agree. Statistics are hard to follow without all the data that was used to make the equations.

4. I attended a primarily Catholic Weblouse program and several Evangelical Scout Troops. They all share a strong bond of fellowship which kept me and who knows how many young boys/men out of trouble.

5. The LDS people take what James said very much to heart.

James 2:14-26
New King James Version (NKJV)

14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.

19 You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble!

20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?

22 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect?

23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” And he was called the friend of God.

24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

25 Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?

26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

So all the "happy families are a fraud" because yours wasn't happy?

No member of the LDS church is taught that you are 'saved' by works. It is only through the Atonement of Jesus Christ that we are able to be saved. People in the LDS church want to follow the Savior and be more like him and live Christlike lives. So that would entail trying to live as Christ lived and that is through kindness and service to others. The first great commandment is to love God and the second is to love others.

@ Dan

I also am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and divorced; now a single mom. I am intensely thankful also for the Savior and the Atonement. I appreciated your succinct witness.

Fred, stop judging me please. Save your condescending sorrow for yourself.

I think the "English minor" just spelled "class" as "glass"!

Catherine,

A person is saved when the HS removes their heart of stone and replaces it with a heart of flesh (is that from Ezekiel?). Initially this may not look like much on the outside but the person makes a 180 degree turn from walking in the flesh to walking in the spirit. One who was once dead is reborn to eternal life. Although this may or may not be very obvious in terms of initial behavior it results in a complete change of heart that will be manifest in the person's life. It at least begins a lifelong struggle against the sinful flesh.

If there is no outward change in a professing Christians walk it certainly should raise the question of whether or not the person was really ever saved. It should be a wakeup call to get serious with Christ. It should also raise a red flag to the elders of the church and depending on circumstances could lead to church discipline.

I belong to a presbyterian denomination, the Presbyterian Church in America. I am Reformed (going back to John Calvin, etc.) in my theology. Usually when I am looking for a church I look first in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC). This was formed back in the 30's during the fundamentalist-modernist controversies when J. Greshem Machen left Princeton Seminary and Westminster Seminary in PA and the OPC was started. I grew up in more broadly evangelical churches but moved to Reformed during graduate school. This may not mean anything to you but if I had to pigeon hole myself I like "Old School" presbyterianism. I've read a lot of the Old Princeton guys; Archibald Alexander, Charles Hodge, B.B. Warfield and Geerhardus Vos was a big influence. I also like the writings of J. Gresham Machen, John Murray, Meridith Kline, and still living - Richard Gaffin, Greg Beale and Lane Tipton among others.

Mark...you judge people way to much...I feel sorry for you with all your hate. You need to learn to let go.

I gave you, and anyone else who may want to find out from the source, a link to what those who actually are "mormons" profess to believe.

In doing so one can come to some informed conclusions, rather than take the word of someone outside the faith, exhibiting serious animosity and who portrays to know what "mormons" believe.

Neither Harry Reid nor Mitt Romney are the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. They are entitled to believe what they like. I will not judge them, that is for the One who is perfect to do. Those who judge without authority to do so, risk condemnation as per the scriptures (both yours and mine!)

As what the *actual* members of the Church say they believe doesn't appear sufficient for you, here is what the Church officially instructs it's members:


Abortion

The Lord commanded, “Thou shalt not … kill, nor do anything like unto it” (D&C 59:6). The Church opposes elective abortion for personal or social convenience. Members must not submit to, perform, arrange for, pay for, consent to, or encourage an abortion. The only *possible* exceptions are when:

1.

Pregnancy resulted from forcible rape or incest.
2.

A competent physician determines that the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy.
3.

A competent physician determines that the fetus has severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.

Even these exceptions do not justify abortion automatically. Abortion is a most serious matter and should be considered only after the persons responsible have consulted with their bishops and received divine confirmation through prayer.

Church members who submit to, perform, arrange for, pay for, consent to, or encourage an abortion may be subject to Church discipline.

Please be truthful and loving to those whom are your brothers and sisters. Trying with love, to convince of the error of our ways is one thing, but when you water down or disregard the truth and are spiteful along with it, that is another thing entirely.

Mark,

I'm enjoying your exchanges with Catherine, too. There's nothing I love more than a good conversation.

I just wanted to add, to that conversation, that it reminds me of an exchange on the subject I had on my mission. It was in the dorms of an Evangelical Seminary College with a fellow who was studying to be a pastor and (in a friendly way) wanted to know more about our beliefs.

We concluded well. Our comment to each other at the end was that we had both been describing "the same coin, only different sides of it."

Now I REALLY need to go do something else.

I have to say whatever disagreements I may have with Mormonism I could never have done half of what I've been able to do on my genealogy without all the microfilmed records from Germany, numerous states, and ships passenger lists. The picture of Jesus (as a blue-eyed blond no less!)preaching to the polynesians or whomever on the wall creeped me out every time I walked in there but it was a fantastic resource once I got past that into the research room. Weird theology, good resource.

Mark, I agree on so many of your points. I do believe the Spirit changes us. I think the only difference between my view and yours is that our wills plays a part in that change. We can't be changed against our wills. The good things we do demonstrate to God our willingness to be changed. And it's not just that, even. By participating in behaviors that emulate Christ, we give the Spirit an opportunity work within us, bear witness of Christ, and create within us a desire to emulate him further. I do not disagree whatsoever about the power of the Holy Ghost or his absolutely necessary role in our perfection. But if someone is not performing good works, isn't that an indication that they were not truly converted to Christ in the first place? Continuing in good works not only serves as evidence of one's conversion to Christ, but it allows us to be constantly engaged in the very things that elevate us and make us more like Him. Sometimes this debate seems more like a debate of semantics than theology.

Since I don't know your religion, will you please clarify for me who you believe is saved and who is not? Do you believe everyone is saved regardless of behavior? If not, what is the defining event in the life of a person who is saved vs. someone who isn't? I'm not asking in sarcasm, I'm honestly wanting to know.

I enjoyed reading this article and am thankful you have opened some more eyes to the truth of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints practices.
As a lifelong Mormon, I have always felt that we churches need each other to fight the real evils in the world. Drugs, pedophilia, molestations of all kinds, murders, divorce etc. Especially while living in the bible belt of Oklahoma in the 80's, I learned to inform, but not argue with those who just wanted to argue faith principles with me. I began to state, we, the Christians, should be getting along and fighting the bad influences in the world together.
I think your article shows many truths, and perhaps will show others that we need each other. THANK YOU Cathy Snow

David M.- Thanks for your comments. However, I think the point of most of your comments is skewed by the belief that LDS members are all motivated by guilt and fear. While some may be, it has been my experience that the motivation is short lived, and frankly most end up where you are right now (not that I am saying that is necessarily your situation, but what you say makes me think it could be very likely). Most active members of the Church strive to be motivated by love. And I also take offense to the part you wrote about not being able to have a rational argument about my beliefs- I'd be happy to anytime :)

@Catherine. Thank you very much for your response. I want to read it more carefully tonight.

Regarding salvation and good works .... In salvation the Holy Spirit makes a believer a "new creation," they are "reborn" or they are given a new nature. They begin to walk by the Spirit rather than as before walking by the flesh. This new way of walking is not a result of anything man can do (i.e., good works) but is a supernatural work of the HS. However, a new nature produces good works that are done for the glory of God and so that the world may know Christ. Theologians of the apostle Paul talk about Paul's "indicative" and "imperative." The indicative is who we are in Christ. The imperatives are Pauls commands and admonishments (law) to live according to who we are in Christ, i.e. to obey Christ. So, the pattern Paul commonly uses is like this is who you are in Christ (indicative), now be who you are in Christ (imperative). The imperatives necessarily result from the indicatives because believers have a transformed nature. There's more to unpack here, but no I do not believe works are necessary for salvation; HOWEVER, they are a necessary consequence of salvation, who we are in Christ, HS transformed people. This is not to say we're now perfect in this life as some believe.

SixMom (and anyone else who reads this),

While I do not apologize for the information I touched on, I realize I wrote in a manner that may not have been as conducive to the message I was trying to convey and I apologize. I was honestly more frustrated at this article than the Mormon institution and I can see where I came off the wrong way. Lack of sleep combined with poor word choice will inevitably create a faulty piece of opinion. Not that this apology will necessarily reverse or take anything away, but I do realize your offense and I am sorry for that.

Blessings indeed. I know I need 'em.

Mark, it sounds to me as though your question is about the works vs. grace argument. I offer my answers to your question without knowing what your doctrines are specifically, but I infer from your comments that you do not believe that good works are not necessary for salvation. If that is not the case, please feel free to correct me.

I wish I had the time right now to look up many of the scriptures (Biblical and from the Book of Mormon) that support the idea that good works are necessary, but I don't. The Bible is full of admonitions to keep the commandments, repent and follow the example of Christ, and the Book of Mormon further expands on the Lord's directive that we be perfect even as he is perfect, and that entrance into his kingdom is granted by virtue of our obedience, combined with the miracle that is the Atonement.

Justice requires punishment for sin, which Christ took upon himself. The price is paid....legally, by him. But the view we have as Latter Day Saints is that the gift of the Atonement must be accepted in order for it to have saving power. One must repent and feel the desire for repentance and course correction, and that desire is manifest in our good works. Someone who petitions God for mercy but does not attempt to align his will with God's will, is not accepting the Atonement. His petitions are in vain. But Christ is eager to extend mercy to anyone who truly seeks it. In the Book of Mormon (3 Nephi 9:20-22) it says, "And whoso cometh unto me with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, him will I baptize with fire and with the Holy Ghost.....Behold, I have come unto the world to bring redemption unto the world, to save the world from sin. Therefore, whoso repenteth and cometh unto me as a little child, him will I receive, for of such is the kingdom of God. Behold, for such I have laid down my life, and have taken it up again; therefore repent, and come unto me ye ends of the earth, and be saved."

The question "how do we become legally righteous" is as important as the question "how do we become legally not guilty." Christ has the power to forgive us of our trespasses because he paid the debt. But we become legally righteous as we exercise faith in Christ, continually repent, and allow the Holy Ghost to purify us. This process (and I emphasize the word process) is how we become legally righteous.

Your questions are excellent, profound, deep-thinking questions and the subject of many written works throughout history. My answers seem simplistic, I'm certain. But just because we have doctrinal differences does not mean I'm not a Christian. I know I cannot enter God's kingdom without Christ. But I also believe I cannot enter without showing him that I want to be there.

Just a few notes ... I don't usually comment, but I had to this time.

I applaud your conclusions. Striving to live the doctrine of Jesus Christ is what brings us peace and happiness in this life. In today's society, that means not conforming, but resisting. Fighting for the things we know are right. Learning selflessness, sacrifice, serving each other, and serving God brings us happiness, and any church that teaches those things will grow.

Also, I was surprised at the comments after this thread. Such hatred and intolerance ... I guess I should have expected it, knowing as I do that Mormon beliefs are such a hot topic these days. But it still makes me sad.

And Sharron, from the post before my own, Thank you for your testimony, especially in the middle of this debate. Years of history have proven that, in spite of the cries of the people who leave the Mormon faith, they are not out to rule the earth or to degrade women, or any of those other things they are accused of.

Church growth, numerically and spiritually, must rest on the right foundation. What is the foundation of the church of Jesus Christ? The New Testament (hereafter, NT) tells us it is Christ – his person and work. "For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ" (1 Cor. 3:11). Jesus said HE was the one of whom the Old Testament (hereafter, OT) writers spoke: "For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me" (John 5:46).

The burden of the NT is to show that the OT focused on and was fulfilled, and is still being fulfilled, in Jesus (Acts 8:34-35; 18:28; 28:23). Our Lord did not come preaching a new religion but claimed to fulfill the existing promises, types, shadows and prophecies already given through Israel (Rom. 15:8-13). "And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself" (Luke 24:27).

Many groups outside of mainstream evangelical Christianity claim that the gospel was lost, at one time or another, or that the church drifted from the truth and lost its focus on the true gospel. And so they offer their special interpretations of the Bible or additional revelations from God to 'clarify' or 'complete' the truth. Individuals and groups certainly do drift from the truth, but this does not mean that the truth has been lost. God has preserved it in written form.

In my opinion, this is where humble, civil and respectful conversations should focus between parties on all sides of any religious controversy. Was the gospel lost? Do we need additional revelation? Or do we need clearer understanding and insight concerning what has been given and preserved by God (Luke 24:44-49)?

Paul told Timothy that his upbringing in the OT scriptures was sufficient to make him "wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 3:15). The NT shined more light on the OT but it did not change it or replace it. There was continuity of truth because God preserved His truth even in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation. The promise given to Abraham by God – that He would bless the world through Abraham's descendent (or seed) – remained unchanged and was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Gal. 3:16).

So what is the gospel of Jesus Christ? This is the foundational and final test for examining what any individual or group advocates. I believe this is a faithful summary from "Together for the Gospel."

"The Gospel is the joyous declaration that God is redeeming the world through Christ (Matt 1:21; Luke 1:68; Eph 1:7; Col 1:20), and that he calls everyone everywhere to repent from sin and trust Jesus Christ for salvation (Mark 1:15; Acts 2:38; 17:30).

Each of us has sinned against God (Rom 3:23), breaking his law and rebelling against his rule, and the penalty for our sin is death and hell (Rom 6:23). But because he loves us, God sent his Son Jesus (John 3:16; Eph 2:4; 1 John 4:10) to live for his people’s sake the perfect, obedient life God requires (Rom 8:4; 1 Cor 1:30; Heb 4:15) and to die in their place for their sin (Isa 53:5; Mat 20:28; 26:28; Mark 10:45; 14:24; Luke 22:20; John 11:50-51; Rom 3:24-25; 4:25; 1 Cor 15:3; 2 Cor 5:21; Eph 5:2; Heb 10:14; 1 Pet 3:18).

On the third day, He rose bodily from the grave (Mat 28:6) and now reigns in heaven (Luke 22:69; 24:51; Heb 8:1), offering forgiveness (Eph 1:7), righteousness (Rom 5:19), resurrection (Rom 8:11), and eternal blessedness in God’s presence (Rev 22:4) to everyone who repents of sin and trusts solely in Him for salvation."

Evangelical Christians who agree with this statement also believe that salvation is more than mental assent to doctrinal propositions. Salvation involves a change of heart, life, character and behavior. True saving faith is proven real by spiritual fruit or good works and love (Matt. 7:16; John 13:35; Gal. 5:22; James 2:26).

Good works do not earn or merit salvation. Salvation was earned by Christ (Heb. 9:12). But perseverance in good works shows that the true believer’s heart has been changed by God's grace; i.e., that he or she has been saved (Rom. 11:22; Eph. 2:8-10; Heb. 3:6, 14; 5:9; Rev. 2:26).

The New Covenant which Jesus secured by His blood (Matt. 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25) includes both forgiveness of sins, by Jesus' atoning sacrifice, and a changed heart, by the Holy Spirit imparting new life and understanding to the believer in Christ (Acts 26:18; 2 Cor. 4:6; Eph. 1;18; Heb. 10:8-18).

You won't catch me crying in my beer over the demise of American Evangelicalism. Christ's kingdom will do just fine with or without it.

...except, if your numbers keep dropping you won't "reign" for too much longer.

Beautifully said Sheryl! I too know that God knows each of us personally, loves us deeply and wants us to be happy. All that He does it toward that end.

So you're trying to say that we Mormons somehow *deserve* to be physically attacked?

Sin is a result of a corrupt nature which only the Holy Spirit can create anew.
This implies that Jesus will judge:
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’
(Matthew 7:21-23)

Jesus indicates here that Jesus & God will judge:
And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. But even the hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows. So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.
(Matthew 10:28-33)

Good chatting with you Eric. Nuts, I understand Mormons don't drink beer. ...but then neither do Baptists. Now I'm really in trouble. But, thank God I'm a Presbyterian. ;)

This is a good article.

I went to several churches growing up...Protestant, Catholic...and I was Jehovah's Witness for nineteen years before I joined the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon Church).

I have found the Church to be the best thing that has ever happened to me and my husband, who, by the way, is not a member but is very supportive of me and my activities in the Church. He tells people that if he ever joined a church it would be the Mormon Church. However, he realizes that it requires commitment and he is not ready for that. That is his choice.

Everyone is different and has the God-given right to choose what they want to believe and how they want to live their lives but it's a shame when people twist things to suit their way of thinking because they have either been offended and have chosen to leave the Church or they have decided to pursue a life-style that is contrary to the Church's teachings. Are they trying to justify their conduct by making it seem that the Church is somehow at fault? Ultimately, we are all responsible for ourselves and cannot blame anyone or anything else for our actions and the way things turn out, as a result.

I think we all need to come to grips with what we really believe and, then, live accordingly. If we are honest in our convictions, we have a clean conscience before God and we are not "grieving the Holy Ghost", everything will work out in the end.

There are many good people in all faiths, who love God and want to do what is right. We are all God's children and I know He loves us. I believe that He will deal with each one of us justly and fairly, according to our circumstances, since he is the only one who knows what is truly in our hearts. One of the many things I have learned from the Mormon Church is to love and accept people for who they are and let God take care of the rest of it.

One comment that was made that I differ with is about Mormon women being afraid to get a divorce because they are "locked-in" to their marriage, if they were "sealed" to their husbands in the Temple. I know someone personally who was sealed to her husband and got a divorce. She eventually married another man, who was not a member of the Church. She went through whatever process was necessary to have the "sealing" to her first husband annulled or rescinded. Her current husband joined the Church and they have now been to the Temple together. So, divorce is not out of the question. It is just not encouraged, which, in my opinion, considering the world's view of marriage & divorce today, is not such a bad thing.

I will leave my testimony that I have received many a witness, by the power of the Holy Ghost, that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the true church and is set-up the same way that Jesus did it, during his ministry, with Prophets, Apostles, teachers, etc. This knowledge has come through years of studying the scriptures, praying and receiving various spiritual experiences. The Bible says that God is an unchangeable Being...the same yesterday, today and forever, so why should His church be different now than it was in Jesus' time? If he had Apostles and Prophets then, why not now? I believe that He hasn't changed and that He does have those things in His church today.

All I can say to those who are not members of the Mormon Church is don't knock it until you have thoroughly investigated it for yourselves and get correct information, from the source, instead of listening to non-members and other's twisted ideas. In other words, prove it to yourselves. Only after you have done this can you truly make a judgment on whether or not you believe it is true. May God bless all of you who are seeking the truth. Your Father in heaven will lead you to it, if you just ask Him.

Yes, Mark, but what you see as solidifying your point, I see as solidifying mine. Belief, as I said, is an action word. "whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil."

As I alluded above, I think you would be a great addition to my "quiver" of friends. Happy is the man who is "full," right?

If you are ever in Pennsylvania, you have a free meal in Sunbury.

Cheers.

Great Article, Brother French! I find it odd that most of the comments to this point seem to be jabs at the Mormons, rather than looking to the suggestions you made. For those of you who got confused, thinking this was an opportunity to pounce on the Mormons again (let's face it, with all the "Mormon press" these days, there are lots of opportunities to comment), this article contained simple suggestions that every evangelical congregation could use to strengthen their flock. The author did not ask you to become Mormon, simply suggested that there were things to be learned. One more thing we could all learn from the Mormons is how they teach about and pay a full 10% tithing. Imagine how much better your local congregation would be if your members obeyed that one biblical principle? Also, fast offerings...would it be asking too much for our congregations to fast two meals once each month, like the Mormons do, and donate the money saved to the poor and needy in our very congregation, using the excess to benefit local charities? I wish the message of this article could be preached from every pulpit in every evangelical church. It could only strengthen the family of Christ. Stop worrying about criticizing the Mormons and get your own house in order!

Thank you, Mark, for your illuminating thoughts. I wish our forum was face to face with a couple of drinks of each other's choice and some good food.

Peace, brother.

@Eric. Yes, John 3:16, but we should read on:

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God.”
(John 3:17-21)

I think the reason Evangelicals are not growing is because we don't truly, truly focus on the fact that we are still sinners and are made righteous 100% by God's grace through Jesus Christ. So churches become places where people are afraid to be themselves and this is true in just about every denomination. It's our only disticntion from works-based faiths like LDS.

As an active Mormon, I must admit to being at least somewhat amused by the responses I've been seeing.

For starters, I've noted that several posters try to paint a picture of "fear", arguing that most Mormons do what they do because they fear divine retribution. I question whether or not these posters have actually spoken with anyone who is Mormon, as most Mormons I know do what they do because they legitimately desire to live upright lives and follow God's commandments.

And leaving the membership rolls? By the official handbook, it's supposed to be as simple as writing a letter of resignation. The reason why the church doesn't just drop people automatically is because there are countless reasons why someone who's an active, believing member of the church can stop coming. For example, my congregation serves a military base; it frequently happens to where service members can be put on alert, get sent to training, or even deploy at a moment's notice, leaving them with little time to notify anyone outside of their immediate family.

And witnessing? I've done most of my best witnessing via Dungeons & Dragons games. In fact, I never went on a "formal" mission. You see, the biggest thing that members of the church do to witness to others is just be ourselves. This right here does quite a bit to shatter a lot of preconceived notions about us.

And theological knowledge? I've lost track of the "good Christians" I've met who haven't even read their Bibles yet but who insist upon declaring themselves to be "right" and "correct" about matters simply due to their being a member of the "right" denomination. Often, all that these people can do when confronted with even basic Christian history (like, "the Bible is actually a compilation of religious texts, rather than something God just dropped from Heaven) is to go into deep denial. This tells me that entirely too many ministers are doing a poor job of ensuring that the members of their congregation have firm foundations in what they believe.

And when it comes to learning from others, listen to the various church leaders speak. Allegories, parables, anecdotes, and even quotations from a myriad of sources are all quite common. For example, Dieter F. Uchtdorf, one of the senior leaders in the church, was a pilot and vice president at Lufthansa before taking the position. Because of this, he frequently relates gospel principles to elements of the aviation industry so that people can better understand them. One sermon had him point out that a one-degree variation in the course of a passenger plane went uncorrected for so long over such a great distance that the plane crashed, which he used to explain why adherence to the "straight and narrow" is so important.

Also, pet peeve time: kitsch. I live in the Bible Belt, and am pretty well appalled by some of what I see in the local stores. Jesus tote bags. Jesus coin banks. Jesus monster trucks. Jesus party favors. Jesus on the cross night lights. If your timing is right, you can even get crosses and Virgin of Guadalupe materials from vending machines. If Jesus is supposed to be so sacred, then why do I keep seeing His image slapped on slide whistles and other such cheap trinkets?

Latter Day Saints have got to stop this pretense that Mormonism is Christian. They disagree with Christians on every major Christian doctrine, including the nature of God (Trinity), salvation by grace, the full deity of Christ, creation, the nature of man, etc.

Christians worship Jesus just as they worship the Father. They pray to Jesus just as Stephen did. Latter Day Saints cannot do this.

Latter Day Saints, please stop trying to pretend that our differences are minor. Mormon theology and Christian theology are mutually exclusive. The only similarities are the words we both use, but they have different meanings.

No Fred, your definition is just plain wrong. Islam would fit under your definition. A Christian has always been one who worships Jesus Christ as God, fully God! Not a lesser god, but THE only God who became flesh. That's why we can pray to him as well. Mormons cannot do this.

There is nothing loving about telling a Mormon he is Christian when it isn't true. You need to understand that Mormonism and Christianity have no real similarities, other than, as I said, the same words that mean different things. You would do well to learn to discern the difference. They are extremely significant.

If you want to know how Mormons are really reaching out to people, you can check out this YouTube video put out by the Mormons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_5GWFpHwjM

I agree with a previous commentor who stated that we should study and have a firm grasp on what the LDS church teaches before we seek to speak about it. One resource that I have found extremely helpful in learnng the basic, fundamental teachings of the church is their online teaching manual, Gospel Principles. I encourage anyone who desires to speak effectively with the Mormons in their lives to take the time to read through this in its entirety. It's quite lengthy but worth the time and effort to better understand those you are trying to reach.

http://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles

I also believe that throwing around derogatory terms (such as cult) is contrary to the admonition of God to "not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness" (2 Timothy 2:24-25). Distortions of the gospel and sound teaching are serious offenses and should not be taken lightly. We have been charged to "contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 1:3). The New Testament writers, through the insipiration of the Holy Spirit, are contantly admonishing the churches to be on guard and refute these things as they come from within and from without. Yet they also admonish us to do so with integrity (Titus 2:7-8).

No, I don't think that was it.

So the definition of a cult was changed so that so called Christians could call the LDS church a cult. The Orthodox church believes the Godhead is 3 separate beings without bodies so that makes them a cult? Judaism doesn't believe in Christ so that makes them a cult even though they believe in God? The Catholic church does in fact claim to be the one true church; I have a Catholic Aunt and I hear this from her and I have read it. So if that is true then every other Christian church is wrong because they broke away from the Catholics. And some Christian churches call Catholicism a cult. Wow. Every single church interprets scripture differently. That does not make some a cult and others not a cult. Christians who call other churches a cult because of theological differences need to get the beam out of their eyes first, Matthew 7:1-5. This was a good article, and there is nothing wrong with using the LDS church as an example. Call it an organization if you will but the same could be said of any church, especially the "mega" churches. If obedience is false then we don't need to obey the 10 Commandments, and the teaching "faith without works is dead" is false because Christians don't believe in works. How dare anyone say God hates Mormons! Putting words in God's mouth! Did God tell you whom He hates? Doesn't the Bible teach that God loves all of His children? Once again pull the beam out of your own eye first.

Salvation is regarded as a free gift; it's just a matter of us reaching out to get it.

@Susan. I appreciate your good yet concise theology!

While I respect the fact you feel so passionate about what you wrote, you didn't read much of what I actually wrote and I don't feel the need to correct a "calling out" that didn't read my exact words.

Darren, the Mormon faith does not offer people forgiveness that is not dependent in some way on your own behavior, as I understand it. Faith plus works to achieve salvation is closer to Catholicism than it is to Biblical Christianity.
There is a big difference between receiving salvation, and achieving salvation. I just made that up but you can quote me on it if you like. lol

People who have truly been born again by the Spirit of God will naturally produce the "works" of that new nature (Ezekiel 11:19-20, Ezekiel 36:25-27). If someone claims to follow Christ and yet their lives are void of obedience to the Words of Christ then they are a liar, and the truth is not in them (1 John 2:4). Their "faith" is dead (James 2:26); it isn't authentic.

The Lord told us that the weeds and the wheat would grow together until the harvest (Matthew 13:24-30). And that will increase as the days grow darker (2 Timothy 4:1-5). Meeting a professing Christian whose life contradicts their profession doesn't nullify the gospel they profess...it simply invalidates their profession.

The Lord also told us that Satan disguises himself as an "Angel of Light" (2 Corinthians 11:14) and described his false prophets as "wolves in sheep's clothing" (Matthew 7:15). The enemy doesn't care how beautiful someone's life or religion looks as long as he can keep them from believing the Truth.

"For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the rightousness of God" (2 Corinthians 5:21). Jesus bore the full measure of God's wrath against every one of our sins on the cross (by proxy) so that when we come to Him empty handed and full of faith in his all-sufficient sacrifice, He can freely clothe us in His own righteousness and welcome us with open arms into His eternal Kingdom. "It is by grace you have been saved, through faith - and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God - not by works, so that no one can boast" (Ephesians 2:8-9).

So I "implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God" (2 Corinthians 5:20). Receive this precious gift of complete forgiveness and exaltation right now (Ephesians 2:6-7). And begin experiencing the gradual inward life transformation through the power of the Holy Spirit who will come to dwell within you (2 Corinthians 3:18).

"I will greatly rejoice in the LORD;
my soul shall exult in my God,
for he has clothed me with the garments of salvation;
he has covered me with the robe of righteousness,
as a bridegroom decks himself like a priest with a beautiful headdress,
and as bride adorns herself with jewels."
Isaiah 61:10

If your congregation is like mine, a good chunk of those "several months" might have simply consisted of "the membership clerk sitting on his fanny and not getting things processed."

I'm the finance clerk in my congregation, and I'm having to cover for the membership clerk because he's falling that far behind on his paperwork.

A google comparison of LDS church reported membership numbers vs self reported LDS membership in the census results of many countries (eg: Brazil, Canada, Australia, among others) will reveal that LDS growth is not quite as rosy as it would seem. The LDS church considers more people to be members than actually consider themselves to be.

My family were among that group. We left the church and for 40 years we were considered members (by them) though we had not been inside an LDS church once in all of that time. We certainly did not self identify as LDS. It was a great surprise to me to find out in 2004 that I was still on the LDS church rolls. Resigning was no easy task either: it took several months and an intrusive conversation with a local official regarding possible "sins" of mine that might be the cause of my decision to leave. Only once my resignation was processed was I no longer counted in the LDS membership statistics.

What an interesting (and rather exhausting) comment thread. I probably should have been sleeping rather than reading or skimming the whole thing, since I have a quiver-full of children to care for in the all-too-quickly-approaching morning. Oh, well--it was interesting. It's not every day that I get called demonic, but perhaps I've been hanging out in the wrong places.

The initial response I had to the article (before reading any of the comments, which are so varied and extensive that I'm not even going to try to respond to them) was that, as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, I live the way I live because I really do believe in my faith. I can't judge others' motives, but I do believe the (main) reasons I've had a lot of kids, have a strong commitment to my marriage, try to share my beliefs by word and example, try to keep commandments, spend a lot of time in Church service, and (I hope!) do unselfish things are because I love Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ, and believe that they ask these things of me because they are true principles that will make me happy. Pragmatically it's a good way to live anyway, but I don't think pragmatic reasons alone could motivate me the way real belief has.

The changes taking place in Evangelicalism are more a matter of corrections of past extremes and errors than a desire to conform to the world. Advances in biblical studies continue. There will always be interpretational differences, but the bottom line as always is being Christ-like. Sadly the conservatives are increasingly focused on the letter that kills rather than the spirit that gives life.

Jesus said that there will be many who call him "Lord" and even do mighty works and cast out demons in his name. But, he will say get away from me you doers of evil, I never knew you. He will cast them into eternal hell.

The rulers of Jesus day told Jesus they were followers of God and Moses. Jesus told them that because they did not follow him they were neither followers of God or Moses but that their father was Satan. He told them they could not know the truth because their father was the devil.

The Jesus one follows matters. What one believes and does about the Jesus of the Bible matters. Satan is a lier and a destroyer and I'm sure would love people to believe that Mormonism is Christian. To say so is hateful and eternally destructive and is to perpetuate this lie. To tell Mormons that Mormonism is a lie is in fact loving because it shows concern for their eternal welfare.

Patrick -

http://www.cometozarahemla.org/others/mosser-owen.html

It's because of sentiments like yours, that Mormonism should be ignored, which allows us Mormons to grow as rapidly as we do.

In other words, keep that sentiment of yours going, and we win.

Word of advice - long strings of text are hard to read on most monitors; you'd be more likely to get positive feedback if you break your posts up every few lines.

It's not that the conservatives are killing the spirit.

It's that the laity is getting too complacent and letting it happen.

I've lost track of the number of times I've had to teach mainline Christians things that their own ministers should have taught them long ago.

http://www.cometozarahemla.org/others/mosser-owen.html

"Mormon Apologetic Scholarship and Evangelical Neglect: Losing The Battle and Not Even Knowing It?" by Carl Mosser & Paul Owens, 1997.

A large part of the reason why the LDS faith is becoming so dominant is because of the very same attitude you express: while Mormons are slowly but surely becoming more educated and more sophisticated in how they present themselves, critics of the church are getting lax in their efforts and are contenting themselves with merely regurgitating obsolete arguments.

In fact, there are people who still think we Mormons have horns.

So please, by all means - keep ignoring us. That'll just make it easier for us to gain more members from among people who you didn't want to bother witnessing to.

It's not that we're works-based; rather, we take James 2 ("I'll show my faith by my works") rather seriously. In fact, those teenagers who attend seminary classes are encouraged to memorize verses from that chapter.

In contrast, I've seen some rather heinous behavior from the mainline Christians that have tried to "save" me. In fact, I was once singled out and targeted by an anti-Mormon ministry because I embarrassed their leader in a public debate (I shot down one of his conspiracy theories); their efforts were more about revenge than good theology.

In fact the natural inclination of sinful people is to supress the truth per the apostle Paul in Romans 1. They exchange the truth of God for a lie. This suppression of truth about God can only be overcome by a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit called regeneration; that is the new birth or being born again, being a new creation.

The definition of the term "Christian" is anyone who believes and follows the teachings of Jesus Christ. Thus, any Mormon who does this is in fact a Christian. You by brother need to learn to become more Christian by loving all those around you, even if you think you disagree with them. That my friend is a sign of a true Christian.

I find this article somewhat odd, how other religions compare themselves to the Mormons. Why is this?...if the "other religions" were teaching truth, it seems logical that people would flow to them, if they are not teaching truth, then naturally, those religions would slowly diminish and lose members. Churches teaching truth would naturally grow. I believe people in general know what is true and know what is not, and when it comes to religion, people are attracted to truth and spiritual influences. Maybe those “other religions” lack spiritual authority and truth to attract and keep their parishioners. The Mormons seem to be able to attract and keep their members. -- I'm just saying, maybe there is more truth and spiritual influence to what the Mormon's are doing, preaching and practicing that deserves more of our attention. Instead of trying to emulate the Mormons and copy their practices, maybe we should join them. -- Just saying....

Tom, we are not saved by works but by grace. Perhaps Mormons do so much so they become the type of people that want to be saved.

I am glad that you are very active in helping lost souls and helping people be more righteous. I hope you have the opportunity to team up with a local Mormon congregation up in Ogden to benefit the lives of people up there.

You're mocking the work of the Holy Spirit. There is nothing helpful or edifying in what you are saying. I HATE when someone makes a declaration about ALL churches as if they are everywhere every minute in the same way that GOd is. YOU are not GOD.

Are you implying that you are?

Generalizations because the system is at work. One system fits every size flock and is at work in every name brand, coast to coast. Are pulpits and pews a generalization or an actuality? Sadly, there are very very few exceptions and usually only marginally different. Are you trying to evade the truth of the reality with a generalized objection?

After repeated attempts to have Missionary Mormon's dodge the most basic question r repeatedly, "So what is the Gospel. Tell me what the Gospel is," I finally got an answer. After 20 minutes. From 2 missionaries: "There is no salvation without obedience." That is their gospel and it is false according to the NT.

I have read thru all the comments-may I offer my few? Galatians 5:22-26 came to my mind time and time again while reading the comments posted. With the problems facing us in this country today, we have time to complain about Mormons??
They are staunch advocates of religious freedom and believe in following the 10 Commandments. Although marked differences exist in theology, there are more similarities in the beliefs of the Mormons and of those who posted comment than exist between the anti religion, anti Christian secular progressives who want to rid all mention of God and morality from American life. Why not work together to promote the things that unite us? Why not let our posts and our dialogue with each other be in harmony with the fruit of the Spirit?

Really ? , do not you know that The Church of Jesuschrist of Later Day Saints is the 4 largest religion in US ? , in a sociological perspective they are not a Cult, a Cult is a very small religious group, and my friend it is not the case.....

I want to add 2 more reasons:
- We have a paralel educational sistem, Institutes for universitary young people, and Seminar for the teenagers.
- Our youth serve a full time mission, 2 years sharing the gospel, this help us to improve spiritual, social,cultural and emotionals skils, all without paiment

I am hearing a lot of negative comments about Mormons. I encourage people here to talk to Mormons and understand what they believe so you don't accidentally bear false witness against us. As a Mormon (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) I have enjoyed my association with Evangelicals and members of many other religions. We have many similar goals and I love to understand others perspectives of the gospel. I am glad that there are so many righteous people and we need more. I don't think having bad feelings helps us accomplish our mutual goals. The devil loves contention.

@Trinity. Good point. Mormon's reject the trinity as do many scholars like Ehrman. They have a different view of Scripture as did Jefferson and Ruldolph Bultman. They have a different doctrine of God, of Christ, of man, of revelation, of scripture, the church, worship, and so on. These are not symantic differences. On the contrary it is difficult to see that Mormonism and Christianity have anything in common.

Roger, thank you for your insightful comment. "I'll take grace in a slow turning church...". We should be concerned about the declining numbers in the evangelical church. But, trying to learn from a cult is not the best practice. Mormonism is an affront to the true Gospel of Christ and we shouldn't be copying their practices any more than learning from their teachings.

They simply believe we are very good people who will live in a lower level of heaven. Unless, of course, we receive the LDS gospel and live as faithful members of that church. I know that they pray for us, as we've had these conversations. As I said, we are very close friends. But their perspective of our condition is very different from the testimony of the Bible toward the lost.

The Trinity: Jesus Christ’s church must teach that God and Jesus are separate and distinct individuals (John 17:11; 20:17), and that they have bodies of flesh and bone (Luke 23:36-39; Acts 1:9-11; Heb 1:1-3)

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. For example, it was an emperor (Constantine) . who introduced a term, homousious, which defined the Son as “consubstantial” (one being) with the Father. Neither term or anything like it is in the New Testament. 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.” Furthermore, 11 of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were non-Trinitarian Christians
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2009/01/richard_price.php
Thomas Jefferson rejected the doctrine of the Trinity, calling it "mere Abracadabra" and "hocus-pocus phantasm." The Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) views the Trinity as three separate divine beings , in accord with the earliest Greek New Testament manuscripts and the Founders.

Dr. Kenda Creasy Dean, assistant professor at the Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton, NJ, and an ordained United Methodist minister. She presented the paper at the International Association for the Study of Youth Ministry, London, England

http://mormonteenagersreligiousity.blogspot.com/

Mormon young people as “top the charts” in terms of spiritual vitality, depth of religious understanding, salience of faith in their daily lives, hope for the future, and general well-being as adolescents.

they offer—in quite unique ways—young people four resources, embodied by the faith community itself, that provide anchors for a religious identity. For the sake of conversation, I’ll call these resources 1) a creed to believe, 2) a place to belong, 3) a call to live out, and 4) a hope to hold onto.

I'd like to respectfully and lovingly remind my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ that we cannot debate someone into the Kingdom of God. They must be born again in order to see it (John 3:3). And the means by which the Lord has chosen to do this miraculous work is through the gospel (Romans 1:16). I understand that there is a place for apologetics. But if we are sincerely desiring to reach those readers/commentors who do not know the true Christ, then speaking the Words the Lord has given and praying for spiritual life to be born within the precious souls who read those Words is the only effective place to begin (1 Corinthians 2:14).

Are we Together for the Gospel?

Be assured, Susan. Your Mormon friends are praying just as diligently over your soul!

I think this site needs a character limit for the comments section. Ya'll are wordy! Good comments - but a little brevity would go a long way. :) - just sayin'. - oh and ease up on each other a bit eh?

[...] 6 Reasons Why Mormons Are Beating Evangelicals in Church Growth [...]

David M.

I'm sorry. After reading your "informed" perspective and reading people's congrats of the same...I have to respond to your long diatribe which I'd rather not do. But the slants and mis information are not OK. As a general rule, ex-Mormons have an ax to grind and their info is often sensationalized, if not downright diisingenuous.

False statement number one. LDS people do not remain married because of fear. Maybe some do, but it's their own manufactured fear which they would probably experience regardless of which religion The LDS remain married because temple marriages are taken seriously as a vow to the Lord, with a high level of commitment to one's spouse to work it out and work it through. We don't just walk at the first sign of trouble or the first rough patch we encounter.

False statement number two. A man CANNOT divorce a woman and then get sealed to a second and remain sealed to both. . The first seal is broken before a second seal takes place. Not only that, but they get the first wife's input and if she reveals the second marriage is the result of an affair or there was abuse involved, the second sealing doesn't take place either.

False stement number three. The LDS religion is one of the most orthodox religions on earth. Anywhere you go in the world, they have the same lesson from the same manual in Sunday school and other classes (within a couple of weeks of each other from congregation to congregation). Same scriptures, same points of doctrine everywhere. I just went to a congregation in Los Angeles while visiting with my husband's extended family and the lesson was on keeping the Sabbath Day Holy. The exact same one my girlfriend was teaching yesterday in Southern Oregon. Every religion has interpretations and values which have changed and evolved over the centuries and decades. Including polygamy (Father Abraham had six wives as well as several other notable Bible prophets and Cain's curse of black skin was commonly taught and believed by ALL Protestant churches in North America and Western Europe - Wikipedia "Cain's Curse if you dont believe that) However this is not the same as a church being unified in its teachings in any given day and age, which the LDS church is and most other churches far less so - which was the author's original point.

Disingenuous statement number four. The sect of "Mormonism" which still practices polygamy is a break-off church of about 100'years ago and they disowned the Mormon church. They have their own leadership, declare themselves as a different church (FLDS) and don't want to be associated with the LDS and are plenty vocal about it. Trying to portray them as a closely associated unwanted step-child is as accurate as trying to say Baptists are really Catholics since they broke off of that church.

Four is enough. David M - calling you out.

You are setting up a straw man that I am acting like I am God. There is a common, general, typical system at work when there are puplits and pews. I don't have to be everywhere all the time to know what is happening. You are avoiding dealing with the sin that is built into the system - selfishness, arrogance, refusing to grow up into the full stature of Christ. Your ability to compare the scriptures with what the system is doing is not in gear. Acts 17:11. To do so is a "more noble faith."

[...] Continue reading at thegospelcoalition.org [...]

This whole sequence of postings has been very interesting to me an d the content of very detailed information. I am surprised unless I missed it, trying to read all of them, I did scan a few posts quickly. Did I see or miss something to do with God's forgiveness of sin, His desires for Repentance from sin, and confession of sin here ? HE will recieve those who have confessed and repented from their sins, and it is best done with a humble and contrite heart. This discussion as such on the contrasts between the cult of Mormanism and the Faith of the Christian has been very educational for me.I am a Christian, but am not perhaps as 'active' a Christian as I could be. I know that Jesus recieves those who have honestly come to Him in faith and that the Power of the Holy Spirit to transform one's life takes a life time. It doesn't happen overnight, and all Christians who do strive to obey Him know this to be true. The works ethic that I see repeatedly here, is missing something very important. When one seeks to 'work their way to Salvaltion, as do the cults, then they think they have it 'right'. They are forgetting Eph.2:8, and 9 through verse 10. The emphasis is that you must first become His child, Saved before you are able to do 'any works' what so ever and then He will guide you into the work that He wants you to do. Not man based works efforts, but GOD directed work that He has in store for you to do. You can't earn your salvation by works before you are saved. It happens only after you are saved and that is a lifetime of growth. Not a short term of service. Though there are missions and ministries that do offer short term mission work, that is because many want to serve HIM but only for a minimum of sacrifice of time, in the specific work of Evangelisim. While the rest of their lives they seek to serve Him locally within their church . It is different for all Christians, some are really called to lifetime service in particular, while others in the Body of Christ serve the church locally. Though the 'cults' have their 'outward positive' spin, they are usually easily recognzied by their appearance and their purpose. Both Jehovah Witnesses, and Mormans have earned this recognition in their door to door efforts. I have talked with and yes led a prayer with a couple of morman young men. I also read to them from First John, and noted their expressions of 'hey, that isn't in our version of the Bible, ' meaning they were taught differently regarding that passage. So yes there are many differences, some are subtle, and others not quite so subtle. Which brings to my mind in Scriptures, the passages that deal with 'wolves dressed as sheep' that is what I think of when I see those distinctive badges on those white shirts. They have the appearance of being 'squeaky clean' on the outside, while inside seeking to do their two years of service in committment to their organization, not knowing sadly, that this service however faithful in the effort is not exactly what the Lord had in mind in terms of the Authentic Christian witness. Yes, it's good to go door to door, but because of the Reputation of the Mormans who do this, one has learned to 'turn that off in approach', and it gives those of us who are Christian a 'bad' reputation because we have sadly, been lacking in that faithfullness, and because of that, if anyone sees someone coming for the specific purposes of Evangelism and doesn't know it, but wonders is that a Christian, or a Jehovah's witness, or a Morman. They are more than likely to turn them away for that very reason. So that's the struggle of the daily Christian in their efforts of outreach in the community. That's why they have used different means to reach out to the lost souls. I have seen this in my younger years growing up and know that I have been one to speak both to Jehovah's witnesses, and Mormans, I have shared my testimony with them, and this has caused some to not be able to respond, because they realize they don't know the Lord Jesus Christ. It is sad because of the reputation for doing what is considered good on the outside has become one to avoid, or be told not interested. It is the Christian who should attempt to speak the Truth to those who are of the cults, if they are willing to listen and desire to learn the Truth. Only the Holy Spirit can give the desire to know Him, and reveal the Truth to the soul that is honestly searching. Those whose minds have been seared by lies and sin don't know that there is TRUTH because they have not heard it, not listened to it and are blinded by those lies, which reveals the work of the evil one with those who are unsaved to begin with. The Lord Jesus knows those who will be His, and those who are not His. There is so much more I would say,but I feel that for now this is what I am willing to share. Do hope that it is understood and accepted by those who may read it.

"Church" growth? Really? The whole premise of this article is flawed. Mormonism is not Biblical Christianity. It is a cult. And therefore not a church. The comparison might as well be between a church and a widget manufacturer.

Hi Melody,

Was your "not being nice" comment directed at me? I couldn't tell if you were addressing me or perhaps John Carpenter to whom I was replying. If it was intended for me, in what way(s) was I not being nice? I want to be open to correction and improvement.

Thanks,

Rick

lot of generalization going on in that first paragraph Tim

Baptist can be just as worked based, having been one. Calvinist can be works based when you get one that thinks you have to understand their definition of predestination to be saved. Every single denomination is filled with individuals that either have a relationship with God or are merely imitating behavior that they see around them. Groups do not get saved. Individual people are saved.

No and Paul says they are accursed. That is enough for me to steer clear.

I'm afraid that any admiration is in effect participating in whitewashing the tombs.

#5 "…But compared to the Mormon experience, evangelical churches are a carnival ride of short services, low accountability, and rare church discipline."

Carnival ride is right. You pay you money and get a ride. Evangelical platform driven gatherings force us to consume 75 - 85% of our "giving" per a Leadership Journal survey of thousands of churches of every size on what is NORMAL church budgeting. Yes, normal! That leaves only 15 - 25% to go beyond the "givers". As a church grows in numbers it is far more likely to hire more staff to please the "givers" by adding more "options" for the carnival ride. More options to consume and fill in our wishes for this niche or that, more youth stuff, more singing stuff, more children stuff, more senior stuff and on and on. Sound familiar? No, more institutionally correct words are used. The hired "shepherds" are now managers of all this stuff, along with the "elder" board. Intimate, mutual, interactive relationships between the teachers and the learners is shallow, postured or even gone depending on the size of the church.

1 Peter 5
"Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, … not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock.

In this carnival routine, not one "example" that you see any of these "shepherds" do is for you to "follow". It's their job or their "role", not yours. You are to do other things. You will not see their "example" in their home life. You will not see their example in their work life. You will only see them at the church campus performing or managing. You are to follow THEM. You are to follow what they say. You are to follow their vision - not their example. Do you see the subtle twist from what the Word specifically calls for? The bigger a church "grows", the more pronounced this and many more twists take place.
Mormons don't have all these carnival options. They are simply divided up into "stakes", where business men can oversee the people face to face, not niche options. The Devil knows God's Word better than evangelicals do. He has organized his substitute church of Christ to better follow Biblical principles of leadership than evangelicals.
Evangelicals are right that Joseph Smith, etc have grossly redefined Christ into a created being, the sexual son of God the Father, just like we are the sexual sons and daughters of our Fathers. (This means there is some God the mother somewhere to give birth to this sexual son of God the Father, but none of their writings speak of her.) They follow a different Christ that is merely of Joseph Smiths imagination. Evangelicals know the uncreated, sinless, one with the Father Christ, yet have grossly transformed the practice of the body of Christ into a carnival ride that severely warps the nature and character God designed into His bride for His Son. We insist on perpetuating severe "spots and wrinkles" that nullify the commands of God. We have so twisted the Word so that traditions of men now are the Word to us and we like it that way. We export it to other countries and expect very poor nations to hire one man to dominate the gatherings of believers in one-way communication fully paid with 100% of the "giving".
We have far bigger problems to face than whether the Mormon nose count is getting bigger faster than evangelical nose counts. Let's start with our own level of honesty with God's design for the body of Christ. We have the right Christ. Now lets get the right body of Christ.

@Mark rick was referencing McConkie to the person that he was speaking directly to,not to protestants.

[...] the devotional over last two days and reading this Gospel Coalition article (GC), I can’t help but notice that all Christians are called to do more–sacrifice [...]

Another thing that puzzles me is that mormons want evangelicals to validate them by affirming mormonism as Christian. It is my understanding that mormonism teaches that it is a recovery of the true apostolic Christianity and every other "church" (Protestant, Catholic, Easter Orthodox, etc.) is apostate. Why should the "true" church want a bunch of apostates to affirm them? Why should members of the true chruch feel disrespected because apostates fail to recognize mormonism as the true religion? It's no sweat of my back personally if the pope says the Roman church is the only true church, or if some TV evangelist says Reformed theology is of Satan.

I would think that since the majority of posters on this site are protestant/evangelical McConkie doesn't carry much weight, probably less than the pope. Protestants used to believe that the Bible alone is authoritative. Many still do. That's another difference between mormonism and historical protestantism, although I suppose that gap has narrowed. I've met evangelicals who think mormon is another denomination.

I intend no disrespect by saying that mormon theology is non-Christian. Islam isn't Christian, I think it is wrong, but they are still created in the image of God and as such deserve respect. In fact I think it would be a REAL diservice to you for me to say mormonism is Christian when I am fully convinced it is not.

If you told me motor oil is water and so you were going to drink some, if I cared about you at all, I would have to tell you that motor oil is not water and it will kill you. Mormonism is a false gospel, it is Christless, and it will kill you and everyone else who drinks it.

KD,

Yes I have, for nearly 40 years. What I am telling you comes from my experience in reading, studying and talking to followers of LDS theology. And I know that many LDS say they worship Jesus. But by LDS teaching on the nature of God, Matt 4:10 must say you can't, unless you don't worship Heavenly Father, and I don't know any LDS who doesn't worship Heavenly Father.

But I am not the only one to say this. I'm sure you know Bruce McConkie, an LDS general authority said the very same thing:

“We worship the Father and him only and no one else. We do not worship the Son and we do not worship the Holy Ghost.”

Now I also know that now that he's dead what he said doesn't count anymore, but I appreciate that at least he told the truth in light of Matt 4:10.

Differences between denominations of Christianity are not even close to the differences Christianity has with Mormonism. Denominations are a blessing to Jesus' church, and most are in complete agreement on the major doctrines of the Christian faith, unlike Mormonism.

Mark,

Sorry for the confusion. That is why I asked for clarification, because I didn't know if you had other questions So here goes.

We believe based on the Bible that Heavenly Father, Christ, and the Holy Ghost are distinct persons, so no we don't agree with the Trinity as most put it. We believe it because of many verses in the bible that indicate they are seperate (see other posts for references). As for your other considerations, there are numerous biblical references to answer them. Consider Romans 8:15-16 which not only shows that Christ is separate from the Father (how can one inherit something which they already have?) but also indicates that we are the children of God. This is what your friends were saying when saying humanity is of divine origin.

However it is in these differences of opinion about the bible that I am trying to make my point. All the different christian factions give each other the benefit of the doubt even though they disagree on their interpretation of the Bible. Yet we don't have Lutherans calling Orthodox cults and Catholics calling baptists unchristian. (Christianity left that unsavory business to the 16th century) We can spend all night arguing the bible, saying whose interpretation is correct. Since neither would leave the conversation convinced, I see little point to it. What I seek is mutual respect, the benefit of the doubt. That is why I consider Evangelicals Christians, even though you insist that we worship a different Jesus. All I ask is for the same consideration.

It is true that not all who claim the title christian are in fact christian. However, I will not be the judge to say who is and who isn't. I leave that to One more knowledgeable and less fallible than myself.

Rick

First of all, I did answer your question, we do worship Jesus and the Father. That is why I think its semantics. Considering Christ worshiped the Father with many of His prayers in the Bible and the Apostles talked of Christ and the Father. Romans 8:16, there are many things in the Bible that support two separate beings. I think its interesting you ignored the scriptures that I cited in my defense.

Since considering all of Christianity is separated by their interpretation of the bible and all Christian sects claim that somewhere along the line the other ones departed from Historical Christianity, I don't see why our interpretation earns us a distinction that earns ridicule and derision above all the others.

I also wonder where you have received the authority to state who LDS people worship. Have you studied my church, been to our meetings, read of our prophets, or read the Book of Mormon? If not I would suggest it. At least it would be educational.

I should say you did sort of answer my question, but not in light of Matt 4:10. "Him" is a personal pronoun. It is clear from the text that it is not "them" or a single group. It also says we are to worship and serve Him ONLY. There is nothing about a "title" here.

Someone saying they are a Christian because the believe in Jesus doesn't necessarily make them a Christian. It makes a difference who the Jesus is that one names & worships.

coming from a formerly catholic family, catholics are just as works based in their theology as muslims and mormons. They do believe more correctly about Jesus but tack on so much extra, and elevate church traditions to trump scripture, that it isn't completely unreasonable to align them with the works (rather than grace) based belief systems.

That isn't consistant with what other mormon friends & acquaintances have told me. For example, I was told by 2 mormons that the doctrine of the trinity is false, just made up by men. I was told by another that all men are divine beings and Christ was the first created divine being. These are not minor issues as they are foundational to the doctrine of salvation. Certainly the apostle Paul taught unity among believers in Christ; however, that same Paul warned believers to accept no other gospel than what he taught. Christianity teaches among other other things that God is three persons in one being, and that Jesus is the God-man, the second person of the trinity who took to himself a human nature forever. It also teaches that God is creator & man is creature, with natures that are distinct. One cannot unite which is fundamentally distinct.

KD,

I am not the one looking for division. It was Joseph Smith who decided to divide from the truth of the Bible and the historic Christian Church. He's the one who went from monotheism to henotheism. It is the Mormon church today that holds on to his teaching which is opposed to Christian theology.

These are not semantic differences. I noticed you didn't answer my question, btw. It is extremely significant! The fact that you don't see it as significant is part of the problem. Nothing really matters MORE than who you worship! Christians worship Jesus! Latter Day Saints do not!

Mark

Yes to all of the above. If you would like me to address any specific questions I'll be glad to clarify.

Rick

I'm sure you're familiar with the prayer of Christ before he entered the tomb of Lazarus, in which He thanks the Father for hearing His prayer. I'm also confident you are aware that a voice came out of Heaven when Christ prayed to Father. John 12:28.

We believe these scriptures indicate that they are seperate people. John 17 also shows that they are one, but one in title not necessarily being. Thus we believe we pray to and worship both the Father and the Son.

However that is not the crux of the issue. Why are you looking for division? Are we not supposed to be united in Christ? Why can't the tent of Christianity hold whomever believes in the divinity of Christ, His supreme sacrifice, and strive to follow Him? Even if our Church is wrong about two distinct beings, why should that put us beyond the saving grace of God when He has said that all sins are forgiven if we have faith in Christ? Why does our minute difference of belief justify your bold assertion that you know how I personally worship and how I pray when you have never met me before? Why does what is a semantic disagreement that even exists among other Christians earn my church the status of outcast among our brothers and sisters?

Christianity, GK Chesterton said, does not lack for adherents because it has been tried and found wanting but because it has been found difficult and left untried (loose paraphrase).

Mormons are wonderful neighbors, friends, co-laborers in political and family oriented causes. I respect them greatly. But the comparison here is a bit wrong-headed.

It has never been difficult for performance based religions to gain adherents. Islam has an astounding number of converts. Mormons are also doing well – they present a well-regulated, attractive lifestyle that can be particularly appealing to people in a number of situations.

Evangelical Protestant Christianity does not fail to attract converts because its lifestyle demands are too high – or because they are not high enough. Rather, we see in Scripture a God who saves us not because of any good we do and then calls us to walk worthy of the calling we’ve received in Christ. In Christianity, only God can make a convert. We are called to bear witness to the light, but not a single evangelical can make someone else an evangelical.

The most difficult thing about evangelical Christianity is not the moral codes – most any religion has some of those – or high standards in external behavior – again, those can be found elsewhere. It’s this – if you are familiar with Chesterton – you’ll know immediately what I’m talking about here: white is a color. It isn’t just the absence of other colors but something positive and something – to extend his analogy – that we don’t have on our own.

In other words, the most difficult thing about Christianity is humility. The humility to come broken to God and confess that we can’t earn a thing from him, that we need divine redemption to change us from the inside out. That is difficult indeed. But the one who comes to him, he will never cast away.

KD,

I do not decide who is a Christian. But Christians, by definition and throughout history, worship Jesus and pray to him. Latter Day Saints cannot and do not do this.

Let me ask you this: Who do you worship?

In Matthew 4:10 it is Jesus who says:
Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Since LDS theology teaches that Heavenly Father and Jesus are 2 different gods, who is Jesus saying is the ONE ("him") we should worship and serve?

No matter what you choose, you answer will be outside of Christianity. For this and many other reasons, Christianity and Mormonism are mutually exclusive.

Hi KD,

Just wondering. Do you believe that Jesus is the Messiah promised in the Old Testament and that he is the eternal Son of God, 2n person of the trinity, who assumed human nature and lived, died and rose again, and who is now seated at the right hand of the Father (1st person of the trinity) interceding for his people? Do you believe that Jesus died to pay for your sins and that you are eternally united with him so that he is your righteous substitute? Are you depending on Jesus and on him alone for your salvation and righteous standing before God? I am honestly interested.

Rick,

I am a Latter-Day Saint and I think this is what Grace for Grace was talking about. LDS people read the Bible. We follow the Ten Commandments. We follow the injunction of Christ to be born again by water and by the spirit. We end our prayers in the name of Jesus Christ. How is it then we aren't Christian.

Personally, I take comfort that no mortal decides who is Christian and who is not and who is saved and who is not. Christ is the one and only who makes those decisions, so I would respectfully ask that you and others who say differently "judge not, that ye be not judged. For whatever judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged." Matt 7:1-2

No Rick it was not directed at you but there doesn't seem to be a proper place to respond to that either. John is taking a bullying approach with the Mormonism thing which is probably all you can do with that position.

The true ultimate difference between those who belong to Christ and those who don't is the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit in those who belong to Jesus; those who are the harvest of which Christ his first fruits, those who have been transferred from the world into the kingdom of light, walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit, etc. Although those who do not belong to Christ may mimic biblical principles in some common grace sense, they do not know Jesus or His Father. People either know Jesus and His Father or they cannot know him because their Father is the devil. They need to be born again by the Word and Spirit in order to know the truth; to be set free from bondage to sin.

John Carpenter,

Perhaps I am not understanding your statement, "Do you realize that the only practice the Lord Jesus explicitly told the local church to do was to discipline people (Mt. 18:15ff)?" It seems to me that there is much more beyond church discipline for the body of Christ to consider and practice.

"Teaching them to observe ALL that I have commanded you" (Matt. 28:18-20) takes in more than one practice -- doesn't it?

This would include keeping a variety of commandments (John 14:15) by which we may know we are His disciples -- right?

Paul cited the Lord's supper as a commandment and tradition given to Him (like the other disciples) by the Lord to give to the church to follow (1 Cor. 11:23ff) -- right? We could add other exhortations and commands related to serving one another, sharing spiritual gifts and material resources with one another, pursuing self-denial, mortification of sin, and a life of worship and renewal, practicing hospitality, encouraging and stirring up one another to love and good deeds, teaching and admonishing one another, etc.

There are many "one another" commands in the NT for the body of Christ to practice, beginning with "love one another even as I have loved you" (John 13:34-35).

As a side note, and at the risk of being chided again for providing another "ubiquitous" link (as you described above), I believe the traditional church discipline view of Matt. 18:15ff misses the woods for the trees. Here are some thoughts on that: http://lambblood.com/matthew-18-greatness-in-the-kingdom.html

Constructive (edifying) feedback is always welcome.

David Pauley"
" … you have assembled Scripture to your own liking"
Actually David, my flesh was quite comfortable sitting in a pew week after week. God's Spirit woke me up so see His amazing plan for the Bride of Christ that has nothing to do with pulpits and pews. They are not in the Word, nor anything that reinforces their use. Our God is not a one-way communication God, so His people are not that kind of people either. Any scripture to refute this?
"…and for your own pessimistic and obviously self righteous agenda."
Actually my heart is full of grief for God's household that are held captive by traditions of men that nullify the commands of God. Jesus himself called this behavior self- righteous. Check out Mark 7:9-13. Perpetual dependency Bible lecturing nullifies Jesus command to fully reproduce. I am optimistic that God Word can set His people free.
"You have lumped all Christian pastors into one monolithic group…"
Well there is a very monolithic system in play, coast to coast, and in every brand name. What % of churches would you say have a pulpit and pew system of "worship" and consume 75 - 85% of their "giving" to fund ministry primarily to themselves? I say 99.9%.
"…and you have assumed that all pastors share a common evil motive…"
I have not stated any evil motives, only evil practices. I am sure you are very sincere, but that does not satisfy God in itself. If you will not do His will by justifying traditions that trump it, then He is not pleased. His grace may bring some fruit to your efforts but not what comes from obedience. It is common for leaders to claim fruit that really is chaff.
"This monolithic approach … uphold your diatribe against this corrupt system as you see it."
Actually what I have said is "rebuke, correction, and instruction in righteousness", the very things God's Word is God breathed to do. Perhaps you have forgotten the function of the prophetic gifts that call God's people to see their systemic sin and repent to obey God. This is dialogue, not diatribe. I am not bitter or abusive to you in the least.
"However, there are many, many, godly, faithful undershepherds …"
Yes, but severely lacking in willingness to examine what they were told it means to shepherd and compare it with the scriptures. Acts 17:11 Merely sucking in everything others have told you and duplicating the past is not good with God. I invite you to engage with the scriptures I have shared, not merely argue and accuse me with no Biblical support.
"…who are diligent workers for the Kingdom…"
Yes, to a point, but much is still in need of correction.
"Your unilateral condemnation of all "paid" pastors is just as wrong headed…"
I did not condemn anyone. I am "rebuking, etc."
"There are "pastors" who seek to set themselves apart in a unique class and there are pastors who strive to be a true part of the flock...as servants of the flock."
Any brother who dominates 99% of the expression of truth of any gathering, week after year after decade, is not a servant of the flock. He is a servant of traditions of men claiming to serve the flock. I used to be a man like this. I praise God he opened my eyes to the deception.
"There are pastors who disciple and reproduce and there are those who don't."
Perhaps but veeeery few. Can you recommend a "pastoral" book that teaches how to equip elders (all of whom are "able to teach") to be the main teachers at the worship hour so that a hired man is no longer needed and the resources can be used to get the gospel to those who have never heard and have no one to tell them within a days journey? I would like to see such a book. John MacArthur? R.C. Sproul? Anyone?
"And the fact is, Paul refused pay not because he thought it was wrong, but because there were people such as yourself in the Corinthian church who assumed that any pastor who received pay was obviously in it for the money, and Paul wanted to avoid that accusation at all cost."
You need to look at the Word through a bigger lens than your teachers. Paul gave reasons for refusing pay with the Ephesians (Acts 20), and with the Thessalonians (2Thes. 3) and other reasons than that in 1 Cor. 9. Take in the whole counsel of God on this.
"And yet, on other occasions, he DID receive material help from other more mature churches who weren't so judgmental and pessimistic about Paul."
And when he had received enough he told them so. Such will never happen in a ministry system that has such a low view of God's people, their gifts, their anointing, their priesthood, and on and on. Do you grasp Pauls assertion that he would rather die than give up the boast that he ministered free of charge? No it was not just judgmental pessimistic believers.
"Sadly, every person whom I have ever met who shares your perspective (you may be one of the few exceptions) conveniently uses such reasoning to disobey the Scripture's command to not forsake the assembling of themselves together…"
How interesting that you quote from Heb. 10:24,25. I listed that in what I said above because it specifically states that the "assembly" is one where saints "consider how they can spur one another on to love and good works" and "encourage one another". This is the exact opposite of what happens with pulpits and pews. Commitment to one-way communication is refusing to assemble the way God designed it. These one another instructions are FAR more demanding on the saints and have FAR greater power to bring them to "in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ", than sitting listening to a Bible lecture. Why? Because "speaking the truth in love," is what is required of all the saints to participate in. Eph. 4. An unending diet of Bible lecturing does not "equip" them to do this or much else. Just look around the household of faith and see the spiritual obesity and lethargy that results from that. Have you "assembled" when not even 30 seconds is given for any one to "spur one another" or "encourage one another" during any of the intentional gathering? Being all in one room does not qualify as "assembly" in God's book. I remember the shock when I realized I had memorized this verse as a youth and NEVER knew what it actually called for. I know better now. Do you? There is no scripture that says "Let us consider how we can hear a Biblically strong Bible lecture with zero participation from anyone else in the room, and all the more as we see the day approaching."
"The anger and pessimism … personal guilt over the fact that they are unfaithful … they blame corrupt pastors for all their own personal disobedience. I hope this is not true of you."
No, not true of me. I have other flesh weaknesses. Now will you follow Jesus teaching and example laid out in Luke 6:40 and "be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus" by "entrusting to faithful men" as Paul taught and exemplified? 2 Tim. 2:1,2 Give up the dependency. Refuse your right. Use your zeal for the truth to receive correction. The Mormons, in all their deception, do not have a view of leadership that is so systemically patronizing as institutionalized evangelicals all the while claiming to be servants.

Your brother in Christ.

Right, and the Pope isn't Catholic!

You said "terminological". Not sure what that means. It's not quibbling to insist that biblical terms be used in biblical ways. Failure to do so breeds flawed analysis. The facts are that Mormons do not experience one ounce of spiritual growth ever, neither personally nor corporately. Given this, I have nothing to learn from an organization that has never experienced the very thing I am trying to accomplish. This kind of article fails to keep in mind how the God of the Bible views Mormonism. God hates Mormonism. The Bible (and therefore God) nowhere directs us to look at organizations that are spiritually dead, blind, and bankrupt as examples to emulate when it comes to evangelism and the growth of the body of Christ. No doubt the Evangelical church needs to improve its witness in various areas. It would do well to look to other, different, yet authentic and orthodox, expressions of the Church to do so. To make the point still further: French (as a support of his argument) brings up the divorce rate of Evangelicals and Mormons. First, the goal is not to be or become an Evangelical. The goal is to be or become a true Christian. One can be an Evangelical and not a true Christian. Given what accompanies true salvation (biblicaly speaking) we know that the divorce rate among true Christians is dramatically LOWER than the divorce rate among Mormons. Moreover, there is nothing virtuous for a child to believe that the Mormon religion is a good thing because it has helped keep his or her parents together. That dynamic actually works AGAINST the soul of the child because it undermines a real pursuit of true religion by the child. What is the end result of "happy" marriages and families in Mormonism? Among other things, an insidious strengthening of damning, false belief in the child. Few things are more concerning or detrimental to the soul of a child than this dynamic. In addition, as one who has done extensive work with Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, the official statistics and claims of positive family life are inflated.

Agree with Melody! Amen!

Praise the Lord!

Indeed.

You're not being nice. Why?

John Carpenter,

As I read your remarks to me and others on this thread, as well as other threads where I have encountered your comments, 2 Timothy 2:24 comes to mind: "But a Servant of our Lord ought not to fight, but to be humble toward every person, instructive and long-suffering." I pray the Lord will magnify such Christlike character and conduct in your life and ministry.

I would encourage you to read this excellent presentation by the late Dr. Roger Nicole on addressing differences in love. Most of us as students, followers and representatives of Christ need to do a better job of taking this to heart and putting it into practice.

http://www.founders.org/journal/fj33/article3.html

[...] http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2012/08/16/6-reasons-why-mormons-are-beating-evangelicals-in... [...]

I think these are great perspectives. The same act can be viewed two different ways depending on perspective. When Mormons faithfully follow they are call having blind faith, when they give reasons they are labeled as focusing on works, motivated by guilt or fear(brainwashed).
Christ described himself being the truth, and light, that his way is truth and that truth gives power and has a freeing effect. Mormon's are disciplined after the ways of Christ, that makes them disciples of Christ and that is reflected in the lives(fruits) and families. They believe they they are living the ways Christ has taught them through prophets modern and ancient. Some of Christ's early disciples backslid and even betrayed him, that did not discredit the truth of what was taught. Mormon's strive to follow Jesus and that is where their success comes from.

I have to agree with many of the previous comments. I was totally caught off guard by seeing such an entry on TGC. I was also grieved to the core. We have been very close friends for years with a family that are fiercely loyal members of the LDS church. Our hearts ache for them. They are in utter bondage to a false christ and a false gospel that cannot save anyone. We have prayed earnestly over these many years that God would "grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will" (2 Timothy 2:25-26). We try to take advantage of every opportunity to speak the truth of the gospel in love to them; that God may grant them eyes to see and "call [them] out of darkness into his marvelous light (1 Peter 2:9).

Where is the sorrow over these lost souls (Romans 9:2)? Where is the righteous indignation over the grievous distortion of the pure gospel (Galatians 1:6-9)? Where is the admonition toward the true saints to earnestly strive to seek and save the lost through the only "power of God for salvation to everyone who believes" (Romans 1:16)?

And where is the confidence in Christ's promise to build His church (Matthew 16:18)? I don't know if this is sound exegesis, but all of this obsession with numbers makes me think of Satan's inciting of David to take a census of Israel (1 Chronicles 21:1). God moved with heavy discipline on the people in response to this lack of faith in His protection & provision.

The Lord has given His people what is necessary to be "thoroughly equipped for every good work" - His Word (1 Timothy 3:16-17). Let's stand firmly on this Rock; resisting the temptation to be tossed about by the world, the flesh and the devil. This is what the LDS church desperately needs FROM US - along with the rest of those who in unbelief stand condemned before our holy and righteous God (John 3:18).

Lord, help us to keep our eyes firmly fixed on the goal!

Learning about modern discoveries, modern biblical scholarship, and about a wide variety of other people tends to corrode a person's belief the in pre-modern evangelical worldview. If the Mormons are resisting that change, it merely means they have more effective dictatorial thought control. I don't see that as an advantage; nor do I see the trend of younger evangelicals to a more modern, tolerant worldview as a problem.

"Can you recommend a "pastoral" book that teaches how to equip elders (all of whom are "able to teach")"

I recommend to you "Organic Church" by Neil Cole. And if you are so inclined, "Organic Leadership" as a followup.

Being a large or a small church is not the point. Being faithful to the Word is.

Whenever I run into someone who tells me how big their church is growing, I ask them what they are doing wrong.

Grace for Grace,

I love Latter Day Saints but I know that what you have been taught is false and is leading you away from the one true God who is revealed in the Bible. Though I can offer you the love of Jesus, is it love to not point out that the Jesus of Mormonism is not the real Jesus, but a counterfeit?

You can be angry at Evangelicals all you want but the real question is who do you worship? Christians worship and pray to Jesus. For LDS this is not possible. One cannot be both Christian and LDS.

Yes, Neil is the best. I was more asking for a book by a pulpiteiring type pastor who might recognize this instruction from Jesus. I am trying to help him see that there is severe negligence nation wide by even the best selling "pastoral" authors in every brand name on Biblical teaching direct from the great shepherd himself. It's all in plain english but their hearts are far from hearing this and far from doing it.
Lord, open their eyes!

Grace for Grace -- would you say Matthew 23 is a demonstration of Jesus' love for the Pharisees?

Perhaps Mormons are better at creating a subculture. However consider that turning Christianity into a subculture, despite our best efforts over the last century, is like fitting a square peg into a round hole. I speculate Christianity will thrive when we are make (become "salt" to) general culture.

As former Evangelical and a current happy convert Mormon of 13 years, may I say that one of the reasons I left the Evangelical community was because of the Evangelical hostility and hatred toward others of other religions. I love the Jewish people. I love the Muslim people. I love the Catholics. I love the Mormons. Call yourselves what you will but when anything but love comes out of your mouth for others you've left Christianity far behind you.

I'm really sad to read such a compelling defense of civil religion and pragmatism on TGC. I understand it makes a good headline in this election year to beat faithful Christ followers over the head with Mormon results like some overbearing personal trainer. But while the author's desire to see the church of Christ trim its supposedly unsightly waistline--broken families! no doctrine! no evangelism! no discipline!--is all right and good--it pains me to see the LDS organization with all its infectious, terminal diseases as the plumb line.

Not long ago, TGC posted a link to this article by John Stackhouse (http://www.johnstackhouse.com/2012/05/27/its-just-not-true-american-evangelicals-do-not-in-fact-behave-as-badly-as-everyone-else/) which exposes this canard for what it is--popular Christian mythology. Please let's stop quoting Barna studies when there is a plethora of better data out there. I understand that many of Mr. French's criticisms can and should be heard by some churches--but most evangelical pastors that I know--have virtually nothing to learn from LDS other than to love and evangelize their captive members.

One of the chief reasons given as to why churches are in decline is low commitment by leaders and members to traditional or orthodox doctrine. But what exactly has replaced this commitment? What are pastors of these churches committed to if not so-called cultural contextualization and relevance? Isn't it true that many of us have substituted rigorous exegesis of Malachi for exegesis of Malick? Instruction in ministry for instruction in management? And now here, we are looking not to the unchanging Word of God for direction, but to an apostate sect that spiritually abuses its members? And we're justifying this endeavor under the wafer-thin cover of general revelation? Please.

Why is this important? Let's think about church discipline for a minute. I am a big believer in it. I've personally suffered from its conspicuous absence. But why isn't church discipline a more common feature in some churches if not because of charges--both serious and spurious--of spiritual abuse? And so now one of the biggest advocates of a renewed commitment to church discipline--the Gospel Coalition--is promoting its cause by waving the flag of an organization whose practices are known to be abusive (just read this thread if you're unsure)? Mr. French, Mr. Carter, and others--this is not a winning strategy. If our goal is to persuade men, especially brothers in the faith, let's do so with precision and love--not boilerplate.

Joe,

The author makes good conclusions as he writes "Big families, intact families, years-long missions, faithfulness to church teaching, and a lifetime of service add up to a sustainable, Christ-honoring counterculture."

Nor do I disagree that we need homiletics, philosophy, sociology, and more to effectively communicate.

My objection is that I'm failing to see how this adds up to article's title.

Let's call people to be counter-cultural because we're following Jesus by being obedient to Scripture. But let's not think for a moment that just by being counter-cultural that our churches will grow.

Mormons, Catholics, Muslims - they are all counter-cultural. I don't want to be like them. I want to be like Jesus.

Saying that "our side" is allergic to church growth is not capturing what I'm trying to communicate - I am saying that I am allergic to church growth strategies that don't have their basis in fulfilling the church's mission as laid out in the Bible. This includes making things "simple", adding programs, or whatever your method of choice may be.

"...reasons why Mormons are beating evangelicals in church growth..."

Is it not primarily because the un-reconciled world loves its own? and hates the true Christ and His Gospel and runs to anything but that? Is it not because "the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God."?

Human reasonings (aside from #1) being presented as biblically viable comparisons/solutions for the church, as if we are a business or sports model are just weird to read here at TGC.

Grace & peace ~

AMEN!!!! and I don't go around saying that, believe me.

Well said, Rob. And, if there is a biblical principle, then we simply need to go to Scripture (since the principle is in the Bible) and we need not look to a false system to *learn*. Let's remember that the doctrine of the Mormons is a doctrine of demons.

You worked with someone that liked the idea of guaranteeing results with his behavior. How is that disciplined?

I appreciate the thoughts but the article does rub me the wrong way. I don't think we should learn evangelism or be inspired by looking at how other religions do evangelism (unless there's clearly a biblical principle empowering it). Rather, His Word should be guide. It -appears- that much of the impetus mentioned in the article is based on legalistic requirements.

You've got to be kidding me with this semi-Pelagian article. I "Amen" brother Rick Owen's words above. The reason why the Mormon church is "growing" more quickly is because it is comprised of lost people shifting from one false world view to another and the Mormons are just doing a good job of marketing themselves at present. Lost men and women are bound to latch onto some false system. Regardless of whether they are Mormon, Jehovah's Witness, Muslim, Atheist, Agnostic, Christian Science, etc., they are still on the broad road that leads to destruction. Jesus said very clearly that *many* are those who go in this way - through the broad road. Actual, genuine church growth is created by God through biblical means according to His sovereign choice. At the return of Jesus Christ, the church will be the exact size, no bigger, no smaller than He has ordained. Our job is to be faithful, to use biblical means to do the work of ministry and evangelism - we plant and water - but it is GOD WHO CAUSES THE GROWTH. If any lost people "leave" the church and die without Christ, they were never a true part of the saved church to begin with - they went out from us - but were never really of us, and no technique, gimmick or marketing ploy will change the number of the elect. The only means for conversion God uses are the same ones He has always used. I am truly grieved by such pragmatic articles as this that seem to disregard the biblical model of why and how the church *actually* grows. Also, I take serious issue with Mr. French's claim that we are playing the fool if we do not learn *from the Mormons* on the issues he raises. Really? Not a single one of these points cannot be more perfectly learned from Scripture. The fact that children are an heritage from the Lord, the fact that God hates divorce, the fact that we are to go into all the world and make disciples, the fact that we are to hold fast the once for all faith delivered to the saints, the fact that we are all called to minister and serve the body with great love and sacrifice, and the fact that we are called to not be selfish is hardly something I need to be looking to the Mormons for. These things are more clearly and more exactly and more purely taught in Scriptures, and more perfectly modeled by men and women who are mature in biblical faith. And frankly, when the Scriptures call upon us to imitate someone, never does it model imitation of false religionists, it says to imitate Christ, Paul, etc. Finally, what makes Mr. French believe that the majority of the present day evangelical "church" is actually saved? Of course, believers can be guilty of sin and hypocrisy, but the real reason why we see little improvement in many areas of "evangelicalism" over the world is because we are pumping out false converts and filling our pews with false professors through weak preaching and a feel good, felt needs presentation of the "Gospel" (which is not the Gospel at all). Finally, Mr. French seems to forget a number of things about Mormon doctrine and practice..they are "orthodox" according to a Satanic system of doctrine, they don't get divorced because they want to become gods of their own planets, the expect much of their members based on a works based system of fear and legalism, and although they may appear unselfish, since they are without Christ, we can be sure that their *motives* are not of the Spirit and are therefore sinful and selfish. Need I say more? OK, I will say one final thing, Mr. French may *claim* to be Presbyterian and Reformed, but even Mr. John Wesley (let alone Calvin, Luther, Owen, Edwards) would be appalled at this article. This is sub-Arminian. This article is anti Romans chapter 9. Paul's whole question is basically, "Why aren't there more saved Jews?" Answer: God's sovereign will and purpose! Yes, he uses means, but Mr. French's article isn't calling upon the church to look to Scripture to be faithful to biblical means but to learn from the Mormons else we are playing the fool. Nonsense.

John,
Try brainwashed instead because that is what takes away discernment. Don't try to dress it up and make it sound like other churches. That is wrong. How does growing up in fear in your own family make for a better family? You are talking about cosmetics, praising the look and ignoring the state of the heart.

Mormons are NOT beating Evangelicals in church growth. Mormons NEVER win at church growth, in fact, they NEVER experience church growth. Mormons aren't Christians, and consequently, are not part of the Church. Only those who are part of the Church experience church growth. Only authentic Christians make up the Church. Only Christians experience church growth. Sloppy language leads to sloppy analysis.

Moreover, the rate of church growth in my Evangelical church is light years faster than the rate of non-church growth taking place at the local Mormon wards in my area.

Rick,

I posted the following as response to a previous comment, but I'll repost it here since I think it is even more applicable to your comment:

While I'm not quite sure what your objection is to this article, you seem to imply that we shouldn't use non-orthodox groups as references. Unfortunately, that is a belief that is too widely shared among us conservative evangelicals.

Obviously we should be careful how we "plunder the Egyptians" for insights, including sociological insights like Mr. French makes in his article. But we should also be careful not to have an "avoid them, their theology is icky" attitude that keeps us from learning from others. Saying that we might be able to learn something from Catholics or Mormons or NT Wright is not an endorsement of their entire philosophy or theology. It's simply an acknowledgment that they may have stumbled on some insight—aided by common grace—that we are missing. We should be grateful to learn from others. As Calvin said, "“Shall we count anything praiseworthy or noble without recognizing at the same time that it comes from God? Let us be ashamed of such ingratitude.”

Also, I think our side has developed an allergic reaction to anything having to do with "church growth." Too often we assume that if a church is growing they (i.e., preachers we like) are either preaching the pure gospel or they (i.e., preachers we don't like) are selling out to the latest church growth fad. There is surely some middle-ground.

I also think we should be careful not to presume that simply saying "let's talk about the Gospel" is sufficient. I grew up in anti-intellectual churches where the idea of going to seminary was considered a waste of time since any preacher with a calling could pick up a Bible and "preach the gospel." To effectively "talk about the gospel" often requires talking about other issues, such as homiletics, philosophy, sociology, etc.

James,

While I'm not quite sure what your objection is to this article, you seem to imply that we shouldn't use non-orthodox groups as references. Unfortunately, that is a belief that is too widely shared among us conservative evangelicals.

Obviously we should be careful how we "plunder the Egyptians" for insights, including sociological insights like Mr. French makes in his article. But we should also be careful not to have an "avoid them, their theology is icky" attitude that keeps us from learning from others. Saying that we might be able to learn something from Catholics or Mormons or NT Wright is not an endorsement of their entire philosophy or theology. It's simply an acknowledgment that they may have stumbled on some insight—aided by common grace—that we are missing. We should be grateful to learn from others. As Calvin said, "“Shall we count anything praiseworthy or noble without recognizing at the same time that it comes from God? Let us be ashamed of such ingratitude.”

Also, I think our side has developed an allergic reaction to anything having to do with "church growth." Too often we assume that if a church is growing they (i.e., preachers we like) are either preaching the pure gospel or they (i.e., preachers we don't like) are selling out to the latest church growth fad. There is surely some middle-ground.

I also think we should be careful not to presume that simply saying "let's talk about the Gospel" is sufficient. I grew up in anti-intellectual churches where the idea of going to seminary was considered a waste of time since any preacher with a calling could pick up a Bible and "preach the gospel." To effectively "talk about the gospel" often requires talking about other issues, such as homiletics, philosophy, sociology, etc.

I'm not a former Mormon, but David's comments settled my suspicions about a number of things. I'd only add a few general things that struck me.

1) Moralistic Religion attracts people. One would think it doesn't, and for some people it definitely does not. But there is an attraction there. The old Adam in us loves stuff like that. So the fact that Mormonism is growing wouldn't surprise me.

2) Alot of what is described in the article also doesn't surprise me because of the "cultic" character of Mormonism... high pressure to conform, total rule by the word of the Prophet, etc. Guilt and fear are the way of the world, so it doesn't surprise me that they function very well on the surface and flourish in the world, while, as David confirms, what lurks underneath the surface is the same dysfunctional sin infection that all of us have.

3) I do agree, however, that evangelicals are taken less and less seriously by the broader culture. Evangelicals often don't even take themselves, or the church, seriously. We are seen as closed-minded and judgmental, and while that may be an unfair jab, it may be because of our own shallowness and tendency toward religion... we are afraid of confronting those who disagree with us us as equals, and I believe that our own tendency toward image and trying to be "attractive" destroys our authenticity and our ability to relate to the broken and the hurting. Why on earth would a person who struggles with depression and is in an abusive marriage want to go to the church, for example? So someone can give them a copy of love and respect and try to fix them?

4) I also agree that the solution is not to keep selling out and watering ourselves down. But the solution is ALSO not to become so "robust" theologically that there is a membership card and dental plan for belonging to church. Jesus did not sell out, did not water down. He met with people as equals, head-on, and could deal in this world.

I have to agree with you, Robert. Mormonism is not a church, it is an organization, utilizing Jesus and the NT story as a basis for its own purposes. Admittingly, they are very well structured and know how to run their organization through rules and obedience to the elders. We may as well be comparing ourselves to companies like Facebook or In-and-Out and trying to gain "church growth" advice from them.
The imperative of this article is that we must:
1. Have more children
2. Get divorced less
3. Share our faith more often that Mormons
4. All believe the exact same thing
5. Look to church leadership, not God's Word as ultimate authority
6. Be less selfish.
These suggestions that do have warrant (2,3, &6) should not be done as if we are competing against an alternate church, but through the Spirit's working in our hearts.

The reason that Mormon witnessing is so prevalent is not from an adherent's love for humanity and desperate need to see them find salvation in Christ and rescued from Hell, but rather out of a strongly-insisted upon duty for 18-year olds to proselytize and act friendly towards their temporary neighbors.


6 things that Mormons could learn from the Church:
1. The Gospel
2. Their Savior
3. Self-sacrificial love
4. Textual Criticism
5. Freedom from religion
6. The truth about Joseph Smith

I wish I could write more (positive feedback would have been nice, huh) but circumstances will not allow it.

AMEN!

I have to agree with others that have pointed out some of the factual errors. The biggest error is the one referenced by Brian above. No one really knows how many LDS there are. Many people leave and remain on the rolls for the rest of their life.

But my main response to this article is who cares? Should we really look to an organization that is an enemy of Christ for guidance? I don't think the Apostle Paul would:

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. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:8-9)

There is nothing we need to learn from the Mormon Church. What we need to learn is how to share the Gospel, speaking the truth in love, to our LDS friends.

Let's please stop focusing on church growth in this way. We are to expect the world to prefer anything but the gospel.

The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Corinthians 2:14)

Real Reason # 1 - People are refusing to heed Truth, the Bible and the Gospel, and they are being punished by being allowed to believe lies.

I really appreciated the comments from David M, James, and James Thompson above. And I agree with "James" above: "This is a poor choice of an article for the Gospel Coalition to post."

One other note: "Church growth" in Mormonism is... relative. Most of the people who are on the rolls aren't active, don't attend, etc. They have a bad reputation for the way they count their membership:

http://www.mrm.org/fastest-growing-church

Also, the LDS church is not growing nearly as much as anyone thinks: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/54036926-78/church-lds-membership-growth.html.csp

To understand LDS growth you have to recognize how people end up on the rolls and how hard it is to get off of them: "Total [LDS] Church membership numbers are derived from those individuals who have been baptized or born into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," spokesman Scott Trotter said Wednesday. "They are neither projections nor estimates."

So, if you are born and blessed into the church you are on the rolls. If you come into the church via baptism you are on the rolls. And short of taking complicated action to get your name off the rolls you will stay on them forever, or till you die if you're lucky. Mormon membership numbers are VERY inflated, just like those of the SBC. And, if you come to Utah you can quickly find LOTS of "inactive" Mormons who haven't been to a ward meeting in years. So, don't get too scared by the Mormon menace, they're not doing that great.

Additionally, Mormon missionaries only go to countries where they are welcome and safe. The LDS church doesn't send ANY missionaries to the Arab world or into closed countries. So, be careful in holding up Mormon missionary service as any kind of example of self-sacrifice or commitment. Those kids are assigned where they will go, they aren't individually called by God to the service, and many families hold out all kinds of "carrots" (cars, college, etc) to entice their kids into minimal service. Not to mention, if you want to find a good Mormon wife you better have served that mission.

I am also a former Mormon and I agree David's general assertions. If we are to learn that having a fear-based culture and promoting more works, I believe we have abandoned the gospel.
While we may learn diligence in evangelism and good PR skills from the Mormons, the rest is a fraud. I don't know the author's experiences with Mormons, but there is a broad range in beliefs and many many sects. This is an example of the good PR of the mainstream Mormon church.
The happy families are a fraud, as well. My experience was hellish and two personal friends committed suicide as a result of disappointing their families by falling into gross sin. I'll take grace in a slow-growing church over turning to suicide in a phony church any day.

Mark:

I'm reading Calvin's Institutes right now, as well as his commentary on John and Romans and you are spot on! Joe's assertions really don't hold any water.

John Carpenter,

With all due respect, you write like you're full of vinegar today. I believe you've stretched some things: appearing to quote me when I haven't said anything like "let's not be like the cults" nor "I have the perfect, NT model." (As a side note, by formal definition, Christianity is a cult since it is founded upon and revolves around an individual: the person of Christ.)

There are only two places in the New Testament where a Greek 'purpose clause' is used to explain why the local church met. In each case, the reason given is to break bread or share the Lord's supper. I discuss this further in "Lord's Supper Logic:" http://lambblood.com/lord-s-supper-logic.html This does not exclude other activities nor minimize the need for servant-leadership and mentoring-discipleship provided by elders. Our website makes this very clear.

The church practices of the NT are pretty basic and clear; and they are the only ones I advocate. I don't believe my perspective is "individualistic" or "consumerist" as you say. Quite the contrary, I try to underscore, as the NT does, ministry by the whole body of Christ under the leadership of its elders. Nowhere do we find in the NT a 'worship service' planned around one individual (the pastor) and his monologue (the sermon) presented to a passive audience (the congregation) as the weekly pattern or model for church gatherings. This contemporary practice, in my mind, is individualistic and consumerist.

Readers of our site can compare what we have written with God's word and decide for themselves. I'm open to other insights and corrections, but your misleading criticisms and exaggerations are not helpful.

But God's truth is never mixed with error.

Mormons believe the three most important things their members need to become firmly committed to the church are: 1) Friends and fellowship, 2) A calling to serve others, and 3) to be "nourished by the good word of God." They believe that high attrition in developing nations is primarily because these young branches are less spiritually mature in loving, serving, and believing gospel truth.

There's a part of me that finds this kind of article very annoying because it is factually incorrect on a number of points and it misunderstands LDS faith in a number of critical ways that statistics can't reveal on their own. And, having lived in Provo, Utah, for over a year now and having spent a significant portion of my graduate studies in Church History delving into Mormonsim I see some problems, practically, with some of these points based on my observations and study.

1.) LDS faithful do have bigger families than the national average; but, so do the Amish, and large families are becoming more normal within certain segments of Evangelicalism. So, the exact relevancy of this point is confusing to me. While many evangelical youth do fall away from the church, I don't know of any study showing that this figure is actually different with respect to LDS youth. The LDS church holds onto youth longer, but only in a superficial way in my observation.

2.) The LDS divorce rate is roughly the same as the national average. Most who go through a Temple marriage won't go through a Temple divorce, so the fact that only 6% of Mormons go through Temple divorce is a ridiculously bad statistic when the rate of civil divorce is pretty much the same for Mormons as for everybody else. So, this argument is a factual error.

3.) I have known a good deal of LDS folks who have shared their faith with me and that should be commended since it reveals sincerity of belief. But, I also know lots of LDS folks who refrain from sharing their faith. This point is irrelevant since I know people of both stripes within Evangelicalism as well. But, this point seems to emphasize the missionary zeal of the LDS church. Having lived in the heart of LDS-country from over a year now I can honestly say that I have learned a lot about the LDS church and realized that there is a lot I still don't know or understand. The LDS missionary project is one of those things I don't fully understand: theologically or practically since I have heard so many good and bad things about LDS missions and missionaries. So, this point simply fails to compel me.

4.) This point also has factual problems. Those LDS folks who go to Ward meetings are more likely on average, by my observation, to know what the LDS church teaches than the average evangelical. However, there are nuances of LDS teaching that even the faithful LDS person will either not know, not believe or even outright reject. That sounds an awful lot like some evangelicals I know. I know a number of "unorthodox" LDS folks, just like a know a number of unorthodox evangelicals. So, I don't see how this point really differentiates LDS from evangelicals in terms of the "orthodoxy" of adherents.

5.) Yes, LDS leaders ask a lot of their members. This isn't always a good thing. The recent Provo MTC zoning controversy being the most recent example of how LDS leadership changed their mind and turned a civil matter into a spiritual one. Also, I don't see the LDS as being all that countercultural. Church discipline does seem any more prevalent, accountability may be a bit higher (but its legalistic in nature), and worldliness is just as much a problem for LDS believers as for anyone else. The point of this argument also fails to recognize that there's a bit of "health and wealth gospel" tucked away within LDS teachings that actually leads some towards worldliness and deep debt, so fact check fail again.

6.) This point is so individual that I don't believe a broad generalization could ever be accurate. I see selfishness within LDS friends, it just manifests itself differently than my selfishness comes to the surface. But it is there. The problem with this point is that it doesn't delve into why LDS believers appear less selfish. A close scrutiny of LDS belief could clue us in that some LDS believer appear less selfish because they are motivated by the promises of their faith when it comes to obedience, that's selfish. This point fails to recognize that even selfishness can lead some to outward morality, but the selfishness is still there.

excellent point. And that's the one point where we just have to suffer the effects of not being able to emulate it, in any form.

Hi Tom,

And, if you should want to break one of those tenets, no matter how well rooted in your tradition, don't worry: the Mormons have gotten rid of other "strict tenets" when it was to their liking: polygamy!

So, yes, Mormons live what they preach until they start preaching something else! It would be funny if you didn't try to involve God in it.

TimA:

Sounds elegant and well laid out. The only problem is, you have assembled Scripture to your own liking and for your own pessimistic and obviously self righteous agenda.

You have lumped all Christian pastors into one monolithic group and you have assumed that all pastors share a common evil motive (especially those who have a degree) assuming that they all engage in a common corrupt approach to ministry.

This monolithic approach is just simply untenable, but such an assumption on your part is necessary in order to uphold your diatribe against this corrupt system as you see it.

However, the landscape of the church is too broad and too diverse in order to universally fall under the broad, assumptive net you have cast.

Absolutely there is corruption, but the solution is not as neat as you present it.

Sure, there are greedy, non-reproducing "pastors" who are driven in their task for selfish, self-seeking purposes.

However, there are many, many, godly, faithful undershepherds, who are diligent workers for the Kingdom, who are striving to reproduce Christ-likeness through faithful prayer, preaching and ministry, and who are devoting their lives to discipleship and reproduction, calling upon believers to engage and join in faithful ministry to the saints and the spreading of the Gospel.

Your unilateral condemnation of all "paid" pastors is just as wrong headed as those who unilaterally ignore Paul's decision to avoid remuneration altogether.

The reality is, there are Scriptures that speak to *both* sides of the issue, and the circumstances vary as much as the men who are serving as pastors and the churches they are serving.

There are "pastors" who seek to set themselves apart in a unique class and there are pastors who strive to be a true part of the flock...as servants of the flock. There are "pastors" who are arrogant and pastors who are humble. There are pastors who are saved and "pastors" who are lost. There are pastors who are wise and faithful in the Scriptures and there are "pastors" who make confident assertions about the Scriptures, even though they don't understand what they are saying. There are "pastors" who are greedy and who receive nothing for their efforts and there are pastors who are self-sacrificial and who are supported by the churches they pastor. There are pastors who disciple and reproduce and there are those who don't.

And many of those faithful pastors *are* paid by the congregations they pastor.

And the fact is, Paul refused pay not because he thought it was wrong, but because there were people such as yourself in the Corinthian church who assumed that any pastor who received pay was obviously in it for the money, and Paul wanted to avoid that accusation at all cost. And yet, on other occasions, he DID receive material help from other more mature churches who weren't so judgmental and pessimistic about Paul.

Well, if it will comfort you, you share the pessimism against all pastors that the trouble makers in Corinth had against Paul. But frankly, there are pastors and churches who are honest and who are making disciples, and who are raising up men and women to ministry and who are reproducing, and who are being supported by the church they pastor (not because they are fleecing the sheep), but because they spend *all* their time and life laboring in the word and in prayer and making disciples, and the church recognizes this and loves them for it and they WANT to do this for him.

Sadly, every person whom I have ever met who shares your perspective (you may be one of the few exceptions) conveniently uses such reasoning to disobey the Scripture's command to not forsake the assembling of themselves together...most don't gather faithfully and regularly in fellowship under godly, qualified elders. In other words, this is a typical ploy in order to avoid gathering with a church on the Lord's Day and in order to keep as much of their money as possible. It just becomes an excuse to sleep in on Sunday and not give sacrificially. The anger and pessimism shared by many who hold your position, I suspect, is often the result of personal guilt over the fact that they are unfaithful to the church and to Christ and they blame corrupt pastors for all their own personal disobedience. I hope this is not true of you.

I didn't read your post. I don't plan on doing so. Because you're opening statement is so ridiculously false. Christians believe that all truth is God's truth. So we should be willing to learn from anyone. So, I assume, to save myself time, that someone who begins a post saying we have nothing to learn from . . . so-and-so, probably himself has learned anything worth reading.

Hi Suzanne,

That's a theory likely developed with no real exposure to other religions. It also happens to be, ironically, contrary to scripture. In Romans 1, Paul argues that even the pagans have a knowledge of God available to them. In Acts 17 (I believe), he begins to speak to the philosophers of Athens on the basis of general revelation. He even points to an idol to an "unknown god" and says, 'This One you admit is unknown, I reveal to you.'

"Coercive" is probably unfair. Maybe "disciplined" is more accurate. I once worked with a man who had been raised Baptist (and probably still had hid name on the membership roll of some Baptist church) and later converted to Mormonism. He had been excommunicated by the Mormons. He said if he goes back to church, he's going back to the Mormons. The Baptists, with their laxity, had proved to him that they didn't really believe what they say they believe. The Mormons, with their discipline, had proven to him they believed what they professed.

This article mentions several good rsasons why the LDS Church, the Mormons are growing. Yet the author fails to take into account one of the major reasons for the seemingly high growth rate of the Mormon church. And that is that the Mormon church does nlt take people off the church rolls aftee they have left the church, after they no longer consider themselves mormons or even after these people have repudiated the mormon faith and been baptized into Chirstian churches. It is extremely difficult for former mormons to ger thier names off the membership rolls of the LDS churh. I am a pastor here in Salt Lake City and we have former mormons who are members at our church who are still counted as mormon members by the Mormon church. This article does not talk about the difference of practicing mormons...who go to the ward house on Sunday, visit the temple, and are involved in the life of the church...and non practicing mormons who have basicly given up on the church. So what the Mormon leadership does is posbgt all the gains of membership but does not talk about the thousands who leave each year. Therefore, this article, without this information on people leaving is incorrect. Is the Mormon hurch growing?

Actually, it does.

1. bigger families: Psalm 128, the righteous have a wife who is a "fruitful vine"


2. lower divorce rates: "love your wife as Christ loved the church"

3. share their faith: Mt. 28:18, the Great Commission

4. "orthodox" (I quibble that this is a misuse of the term and that it should be "disciplined), so Mt. 18:15ff, 1 Cor. 5, Titus 3:15 (excommunicate the divisive)

5. ask a lot of their members: Ephesians 4:12ff, the members are to do the "work of the ministry" so as to build up the Body.

6. less selfish: "do unto others . . ."

Doesn't it stand to reason that if you follow these practices you're life (including the life of your religious organization) will be better?

[...] is the executive director of Desiring God and an Elder at Bethlehem Baptist in Minneapolis, MN) Six Reasons Why Mormons Are Growing and Evangelicals Aren’t Keeping Pace (Read, be convicted, and [...]

Rick,
You don't understand the New Testament model of the church. You've let your individualistic and consumerist culture obscure your vision of NT leadership (e.g. Heb. 13:17) and membership, while emphasizing what the NT doesn't command (e.g. the Lord's Supper at every meeting.) And I note, the irony here: you say, "let's not be like the cults" when you are doing exactly what they are doing, saying "I have the perfect, NT model", complete with a link to draw us in and proselytize us! Oh, the irony.

All truth is God's truth. If the Mormons have discovered some truth, we should learn from them. Not wanting to learn truth, no matter the source, is a failure to love God.

As someone who lives in a close knit community that is about 70% Mormon, I was intrigued to read this article. We have engaged in relationship with our neighbors, visited the new Mormon temple with them, and in general observed how they live.

My observations are that the reason the Mormon church is growing so well is because they offer a religion that is very appealing. It's the perfect religion for middle-upper class white people (which is the socio-economic demographics most prevalent in the church.) They can do good works, receive rewards for those good works, and they get to be with their husbands/wives/children/family forever in heaven. Who wouldn't want that to be true??

So although I understand where you are coming from, I feel like your article had somewhat of a fear based theme running through it. Yes, evangelicals have our issues FOR SURE. They are many. But as our faith is based on the fundamental principle that we are broken, sinful people in need of a savior, we are going to find our churches full of broken, sinful people that sometimes make mistakes. I'm not applauding these mistakes that taint Christ's image by any means. I am just merely trying to show that the biggest difference between Mormons and Evangelicals in America is that the first offers a great works based eternal reward system that ends in a type of heaven where you get to be all of your loved ones and you become your own God. The 2nd offers a path of sanctification based on accepting a free gift of Grace and ends in a type of heaven where it's not at all about you, it's all about God. Any rewards we are given we want to lay down at the feet of our Lord. Which religion do you think would be more appealing to the generic American? @TheSeminaryWife

Wise words. Thanks for taking the time and energy to contribute them here.

Do you realize that the only practice the Lord Jesus explicitly told the local church to do was to discipline people (Mt. 18:15ff)?

Actually in our experience of door to door evangelism, Mormons (behind Jehovah's Witnesses) are resistant and even hostile. When evangelicals practice "evangelism" like they do, they're not welcoming at all.

You need to establish how the article is "semi-Pelagian." Please show me how, in this article, the author expressed the theological idea that we do not inherit the guilt of Adam; that is, please show me how this article rejected the imputation of Adam's guilt. If you can't establish that, then you need to retract that accusation.

It sounds to me like you're a hyper-Calvinist, that is someone who denies that God works through means. William Carey's defense of missions was that God works through means. You don't seem to understand that. The kinds of factors the author cites are those that seem to impact the numerical growth of a religious movement. Noting that observation in the creation isn't being "semipelagian". It's taking seriously the means that God has set in place.

You know, that kind of quibbling about terminological isn't helpful. I think we all understand that the author wasn't using the term "church" in a narrowly, New Testament theological sense. It appears that Mormonism is growing faster. And we can learn lessons from that.

You forgot one huge reason that the LDS church is growing while the Evangelical church shrinks: Mormons are generally welcoming and kind towards their neighbors, regardless of what faith you are. Living in the Southwestern US, Evangelicals here are generally NOT doing this at all. It is sad when a life-long follower of Jesus feels like they have, at times, more in common with the Mormons than their own brothers and sisters of the faith. If the LDS church wasn't heretical, I would join them in a second.

You're not really disagreeing with the original author (except about "orthodox"); you're just exposing the real motivation behind the fewer divorces, more time in religious works, etc. Yes, it's works and fear based. But that still makes for better families and faster religious growth than hedonism and antinomianism.

You're right about calling them "orthodox". The author should have used a term like "disciplined", "instructed", "catechized".

Let's add #7. They teach that heaven is attainable by good works. Men will flock to a religion that tells them there is something good in them to merit standing before God.

Hi Rick,

I've wasted time in the past trying to reason with you, even quoting scripture that emphatically and clearly teaches contrary to what you do (such as 1 Cor. 9), and won't make that mistake again. I simply noted the irony that you begin by saying, paraphrasing, 'let's not learn from the cults' and then you employ exactly their strategy and assumptions, i.e. 'I have the true NT model everyone else has been missing' and then you give give your ubiquitous link so as to draw in people. Even your verbose response to me again invited people to be proselytized by you.

I certainly don't think you are as errant or heretical as the Mormons. But I don't think you have a particularly good grasp of exegesis; your lack of theological education is obvious as is your self-confidence. I think the casual reader should be aware of that.

We do not want to emulate the coercive indoctrination program of mormonism. Since when did we look to cults for church growth advice?

If you leave the mormon church you lose your family (including divorce and loss of child custody), you lose your job if you most likely work for a mormon employer. You are ostracized from the community and not allowed in their homes.

There is not much of a choice for Young Mormons.

We believe in the Love of Christ being compelling for belief, not social coercion.

Lets think before we write.

"Church growth" (more converts) among groups following the broad way which leads to destruction will always be greater than the narrow way which leads to life. Jesus set our expectations about this early on (Matt. 7:13-14; note also the warning which follows in v. 15 about false prophets). Bigger is not always better.

Rather than try to grow as big or bigger than another group (perhaps by doing the same kinds of things you say help Mormon groups grow?), why not focus on following the apostolic, Christ-centered, body-ministry model found in the New Testament (Acts 2:42-47; Rom. 12-14; 1 Cor. 1, 12-14; Eph. 4:11-16)? This should be our focus and goal regardless of how 'the competition' is doing.

More thoughts here: http://lambblood.com/ekklesia.html

I've known plenty of Mormons with acne.

As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ("Mormon"), we have strict tenets, including abstaining from the use of alcohol, tobacco, illegal drugs, and sex outside of marriage. We are expected to pay a tithe. In today's society, I think it is a miracle that anyone joins our church, but it continues to grow and it appeals to many people who like an organization that lives what it preaches. For many Christian churches nowadays, you don't even need to be baptized to become a member.

I remember when I first became a Christian there was an ex-Mormon guy in church and one day I asked him how was he able to get out of Mormonism? he said, "I was flying back to the US having just completed my two year mission in China and I sat for the whole trip next to a pastor. When I realized how much better he knew the Bible than I did, I abandoned the Mormon faith." I'll note that you didn't mention that any of the reasons why the Mormon church is growing is because of their commitment to the truth. Don't you think that's a pretty important part of church growth?

Yes, I will have to disagree with #4. Mormons are often unaware of their history and theological foundations.

Some good takeaways here, but the premise that they have a stronger counterculture, . . and thus their church is more successful is one I wouldn't leave unqualified. All cults probably have a stronger counter culture than Christianity and that's not a good thing. What about the Bible's admonition to be "in and not of" the world? I wouldn't want our evangelical churches to dominate the life of their members in this way.

[...] might we suggest, possible reasons why mainline Protestantism is losing out, and why Catholics would be ill advised to...: The Barna Group recently compiled the results of a number of national studies and published a list [...]

[...] 6 Reasons Why Mormons Are Beating Evangelicals in Church Growth: one religious group shows consistent growth year by year and decade by decade. Mormons, living in the same country and culture as evangelicals, keep growing their church. Why? [...]

It's interesting that the title and blog revolve around LDS being the "fastest growing" religious segment. However, if you reference the article, it's all about how you analyze the numbers:

Mormons may have seen a 1.42% growth, but that amounts to 84,832 new members. Not a number to dismiss.

On the other hand, Catholics have seen a .57% growth, which in the surface seems "small" compared to Mormons... but it equals 388,257 new members.

Statistically speaking, smaller groups will always see more dramatic percentage increases and decreases. For example - if a cult has 10 members and recruits one more, it's membership has increased 10%. That doesn't necessarily represent a massive shift of the population gravitating towards some different theology.

The article actually states Seventh Day Adventists are the fastest growing percentage-wise at 4.31%, but that equals 43,141 new members.

I'm more interested in the Catholic total new members. Mega-churches get accused of growing their numbers through "God Lite" theology, yet the (what most protestants would call) legalistic/religious churches are the ones gaining more members.

I heard on the radio this morning that Catholic hospitals still make up 15% of health care, and obviously still make up the bulk of private schools and charities. So that leaves another question: many scoff at them for being "works-based" rather than faith... but they ARE doing the bulk of the work. So is David right? Are our baptist/evangelical/protestant churches too much show-and-no-go?

Just some thoughts. Very interesting article and a good look in the mirror.

Jerry

"If it's really that simple, then let's go back to the original quesiton: Why are people leaving the church now more than before?"

I would go out on a limb and say God has not saved them. There is certainly a harvest principle at work - as parents are less committed to the Gospel, their kids don't see it as worth pursuing either.

Just my 2 cents.

" the primary reason anyone leaves the Church is because they're not a believer."
If it's really that simple, then let's go back to the original quesiton: Why are people leaving the church now more than before?

I do agree with you about Barna not always being helpful. When one digs into the study and similar studies, you find out that the issue is not "Left the church" but rather "took time off from the church". Still an issue, but not the same.

David M,
Good stuff to know, and thanks for sharing.

With your perpective, what would you say are the reasons for their growth rate being higher than some Christian churches?

Especially when we have heard, "If God is there, then there is growth, and where God isn't.." I don't always agree with that statement, but many do.

Very interesting article, and fascinating how you could have replaced the word 'Mormon' with 'Baptist' in each of those six reasons, and you'd have an excellent formula for not just church growth, but for refortification of the church.

But curious how you cite things like "Mormons have bigger families" and then just let that ball drop. "Yep, they have bigger families. Oh well, we decided to only have two kids, so guess there's nothing we can do about that." How about some reformation of the perception of children in the church, not as a nuisance and inconvenience as the secular world sees, but as the Psalm 127 blessing and heritage, as multiple arrows in the quiver of the warrior? These days family size seems to be one of the biggest tabboos in the church. Why?
(hint: 4 kids was considered a small family 100 years ago)

I used to attend a PCA church ages ago (back before I was convicted by Scripture of the folly of sprinkling water on unrepentant, sinful babies and calling it a romish "sacrament") and one of the thing striking about that particular denomination, anywhere I went, was how everyone just had 1-2 children, and that was just the norm. Perhaps it's time to give family size a second thought, if for no other reason than keeping the church flourishing.
The Mormons have.

Let's see, how 'bout fallen mankind (not picking on Mormons here, and including many who might consider themselves "Christian") loves darkness rather than light, seeking to be wise they have become fools, they have become corrupt in their thinking. How 'bout men's minds are "idol factories" per Calvin. They hate Christ and His kingdom, the truth, and those who belong to Christ. They walk according to the powers of the prince of this evil age, according to the flesh, and not according to the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit. Why did the people gather together to build the Tower of Babel? It wasn't a better church growth model.

David,

You have some good point here, but I would recommend some tweaks. Here are some general observations, please take them as

constructive criticism, not as one trying to be overly critical.
The term/title "Church Growth" alongside the term evangelical is misleading. While I understand loosely utilizing the term in a pejorative sense, the LDS are certainly not a Church in the true sense of the word.

Also, the "orthodox" point is misleading. There are many variations with Mormonism. The polar opposites are LDS and FLDS, with many variations in between.

The major part missing from this article is Mormonism is a non-Christian sect. This drives their theology and practicality. If we look at the action without assessing the guilt laden and works based teaching, we can never understand the true nature of its growth. From this point, we can accurately assess all six of your points.

Cheers,
Mike

It's been awhile since I read the Institutes, but there is very little methodological similarity to Calvin's use of external sources. The primacy of scripture in Calvin's theological discussions is always very clear. His purpose doesn't appear to be to engage or accomodate culture but to interact with historical theology and delineate his theology.

Agreed. You could write a similar article about the Prosperity Gospel.

As for the Barna tie-in, I usually find their stuff part helpful, part distracting. That list of six reasons young people leave the church might give a bit of insight, the primary reason anyone leaves the Church is because they're not a believer.

It's certainly worth exploring why so many children from evangelical homes leave, but not through the lense of a false religion.

While it is very true that believers should not seek to learn anything from an organization so severely anti-Christ, the devil does know what God's Word says and is free to use some key principles from it that are very productive in building community. Yes, the Devil himself may be using Biblical principles FAR BETTER than Spirit in-dwelt followers of Christ.

So my questions is: What is the Mormon church doing that is in obedience to God's Word that evangelicals are disobeying and yet calling it all "godly"?

"Seven Habits of Highly Effective Leaders", written by a Mormon is all about reproductive leadership. He lays out beautifully the whole process of disciple making or leadership reproduction (without the Bible). The Mormon church practices leadership reproduction without seminary's, without asking men to quit their job and dedicate their whole livelihood to giving weekly Bible lectures or managing crowd oriented programs. Every "local church" is grown by marketplace leaders. No one gets a pay check. Everyone serves "free of charge". 1 Cor. 9:18 Mormon leaders are eager and aggressive at multiplying their responsibilities and commitments to a greater number of men so the weight of leadership is truly shared. This is exactly what Jesus taught in Luke 6:40 with a one line statement on what it means to be a teacher. "A student is not above his teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like his teacher." Paul adds to this concept in 2 Tim. 2:1,2 "You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others. This is leadership reproduction.

Things that are living will reproduce by God's design. This is exactly what does not happen in evangelical teaching services called "worship services" which are dominated by a very heavy commitment to a sacerdotal, (look it up if you don't know what it means) pedestalized form of leadership which is designed NOT to reproduce. Believers are designed to be perpetually dependent on at least one hired expert usually called a "pastor". After he has pastored for 20 years and moves on, another expert leader must be hired because no one was "fully trained" to be "like him" even though Jesus said this is what a teacher does. Believers are expected to need a hired man to give them a Bible lecture every week of their whole life to "feed" them. Shepherds are seen as a separate cast of believer that have experienced a "special call" from God to "the ministry", to never work in the marketplace and take all his needs from the offering plate till he dies. We have all called this tradition "God's plan" when it contradicts the Word I have given and much more. There is no scripture whatsoever that say's shepherding is a perpetual dependency ministry, but that is what is done and claimed to be true by all the PHd experts for the last 1000 years or more.

All of Paul's teaching on "refusing" the "right to be paid" is completely thrown under the ecclesiastical bus. (Acts 20, 1Cor. 9 (the whole chapter), 2 Thes. 3 and much more). The official line is to ONLY talk about the verses where he taught the "right to pay". These are all presumed to mean that pay always means 100% of all your needs because believers "need" a "full-time" Bible teacher. (Not if the leader is reproductive.) It all feels good and mostly looks good but it is non-reproductive and forces the saints to consume 75 - 86% of the "giving" to buy this routine. So that is all pooling instead of giving because giving always goes beyond the giver - but not here.

Mormons don't know any of the scripture that teaches reproductive leadership or refusing the right to be paid, but the Devil does. Now most of Mormon collections are for outreach instead of dependency leadership. Can you just imagine how much missions and serving the poor could be done if evangelicals broke out of the sacerdotal-dependency addiction (a hangover from our Roman Catholic roots) and rejoiced in full reproduction and full participation in their gatherings just like God has designed and instructed? (Heb. 10:24,25; Col. 3:16; etc)

I realize I have cut to the core of some of the deepest sacred cows of evangelicals. You might be seething now. Calm down and look at the Word. Be a Berean. Acts 17:11. There is not space in this blog to completely unravel the tight web of traditions of men that is wrapped around what the institutionalized version of faith has been doing. I've given it a good start.

Agreed. Great article, David.

Certain disciplines are good, although they dont lead to HEAVEN. I believe when disciplined in one thing, it leads to discipline in other things

MORMONS ask a LOT from their MEN/BOYS.. in Christian churches, even orthodox ones, the GIRLS are doing more than the boys IF AT ALL. that is the main difference between the two i see... BOYS are the ones evangelizing..PLUS... they dont drink or eat caffenne.(Romney looks reeeeel good) That is a hard discipline to follow, BUT it shows in their skin tone. They look less ruddy and more clear faced.even the 'nonwhite ones' LOL

I agree with your thoughts Dave M. I live in Ogden, Utah and also serve as a pastor at a church here and the your thoughts are exactly the thoughts I was having as I read it.
Mormons get less divorces because there is social and eternal consequences for them if they get divorced.
Mormons are more helpful (pt. 5) because they have to do more to be with the Father.
Point being, your Mormon neighbor is driven by works because it means everything to them, this includes not getting divorced, sharing your faith, serving the church/community and so on.

I'm sure the author isn't ignorant of these things, at least I would hope not, but he sure didn't elude to knowing these details in his article.

This is a poor choice of an article for the Gospel Coalition to post.

6 Reasons Why Mormons Are Beating Evangelicals in Church Growth?

Let's talk about the Gospel, not compare ourselves to a cult and pontificate about why their church growth strategy works.

Well said.

[...] (The Gospel Coalition) Our churches face a demographic crisis. [...]

I don't have an objection to it being posted as much as a refusal to learn anything from the comments. It's a good discussion. I understand the intention of the article but it is possible that something else can be learned instead. You just need to quit defending the intention and see what can be learned.

Two things

This "moral" organization does not have a pro-life stand.

and

We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment. We all fade like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away. Isaiah 64:6

I raise my children with grace. They have Mormon friends and are very frustrated by their legalistic lives. My children lead moral faithful lives but it is out of love for God and not because of what they think they will get out of it.
I don't know why Satan has been so successful with that group. Maybe that is what we should be questioning instead of how we can copy it. All those lost souls comfortable in this life. It's really sad. No wonder they don't see their lostness if we are sitting by and admiring them and their success in this life.

WOW I can't believe you put Catholic in the same category as Muslims and Mormons. That is so wrong and unChrist-like.

No, the objection is the WAY these authors are cited, not *that* they were cited.

We, Christians, all know that America is not a "Christian Nation", but it could be defined as a Mormon Nation. Mormonism is a truly American religion. Yet a new religion has evolved out of the roots of Mormonism. The new religion of 'Americanism' that worships the simultaneous theistic and deistic 'God of Liberty' via the proselytizing of the likes of Glenn Beck is the essential reason for the Mormon success and the Church's failure. http://tinyurl.com/8fmfph3

No, the Bible does not present these five points in the way Mr. French has outlined them.

No, of course not :-) I am saying that Biblical solutions are not found in a false religion nor any system that the world embraces, if even by analagous comparison. Why do we need to look at the life of the Mormon to see/fix what's wrong with Christiandom? We have the scriptures.

The author addresses real problems happening in the church but doesn't address real causes and solutions, rather points to the washed cup of the model Mormon.

Orthodoxy, marriage, faith and works are biblical Christian standards first, not all what the world has subsumed them to be. What determines success (as such) in the lives of Christians and churches begins with a) A supernatural working of the Holy Spirit-one heart at a time and b) Churches where these sheep are rightly fed and discipled by biblical leaders/teachers. This isn't a model for church growth but a standard for righteousness and true conversion of the saints. The rest will follow, and God will grow His Church.

Thankfully my husband and I belong to such a church, where biblical orthodoxy is taught, marriages are strong, familes are growing lots of children (!), we serve eachother inside and outside the church and share our faith. God is good :-)

Thanks, Joe.

Sorry, I meant to say living a 95% secular life. It's 3:30 at the moment and while my brain is awake, my fingers aren't wanting to match up. Oh well. You get the idea.

As an ex-Mormon, I will respectfully* disagree on a few points. I'm not here to say you're absolutely wrong, but as someone who has been inside of "the machine," I'm able to weigh out these numbers with experience. Granted, everyone's experience will be different, but still. Hear me out. Just throwing a different perspective out there, especially for those who are unfamiliar with the religion. :)

1) Mormons have a fear of getting divorced, due to their temple ordinances and being sealed for "time and all eternity." Whereas a man can divorce a woman and get remarried and be sealed to both women, the woman can only be sealed to one man, which sets her fate, if entering into the Celestial Kingdom, being his wife forever while he has other wives, as well. The church strongly looks down upon divorce in this context and while I do not believe divorce is the first option anyone should consider, there is a bit of a fear-based reason behind this and that's not a marriage. Also, your statement of "a family that stays together prays together." Definitely not the case, either. Seems a little backwards?

2) The LDS denomination is not orthodox. Well. I guess NOW it is but it's not the original sect of Mormonism. If that makes sense? If you do research and see how the church really started out, you'll find they have veered from numerous doctrines, including polygamy, allowing colored people to hold the Priesthood, etc. There are numerous other tenets, as well, which is why you have the sect of Mormonism that still practices polygamy quite strongly and the LDS church wants no ties with them.

3) It's hard for me not to comment on your own personal theology I see bleeding through in this article (I'm not Reformed whatsoever; I just like some of the articles you guys post) but to say 95% of Mormons don't live a "secular" lifestyle (which I hate the terminology, but since you said it...) is a BOLD claim. A very very very bold claim. There are "good" people in the Mormon church, sure, just like there are good atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, etc. I have issues with percentages like that, because it's so easy to make up and seem credible but take away from the validity of your article. At least for people like me.

4) Mormons ARE more involved in their religious work, I suppose, but back to the guilt thing, you'd be surprised how much crap a teenage boy will get for not being involved in scouts or Young Mens or any other activity they have set up. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the ideology of covering, but these guys take it to the extreme. I rarely ever met anyone in the Mormon church who could think for themselves when it comes to theology and that's not something to be proud of. Sure, it's good that they are organized but if the Prophet says something, that's what goes and that's something to be feared, not praised.

5) I just can't get behind the fact that Mormons (as a whole) are less selfish. I know some great members of the LDS church but (since you are working with generalities here) I know a lot who are motivated by works, not love, so how is that less selfish?

I think the biggest thing we have to learn from the Mormon church is to stop placing our ideals in doctrines and denominations. I know this is the WRONG place to be talking about that, but I mean, come on. This church was founded by a young boy who had some sort of visitation (whether it was a dream or by "a messenger of light") and has duped millions of people posthumously. Acts 17:11. The Bereans were praised for checking the scriptures to see if what Paul (of all people!) said was true, and they were comparing it with incomplete canon.

There is a lot of good in this article, and I'm glad you're willing to see the "good" in the Mormon church. However, any good from this (apart from numbers) needs to be found from Christ, not from a religion based on the idea that Jesus isn't even God. Why settle for a cheap imitation?

* I've seen numerous dissenters, trolls, etc on this site and I refuse to step in line with attitudes like that. However, I am a firm believer that if you are going to present an idea like this in a public forum, you are open to whatever comes your way and I have faith you can take my ideas/criticisms constructively, rather than personally.

Blessings!

I think, Joe, that we're seeing some differing perspectives on common grace and the utility of such disciplines as history and sociology for guiding the church into God's truth. Readers familiar with the work of Christian Smith (especially American Evangelism: Embattled and Thriving along with Soul Searching) and Rodney Stark (see The Rise of Christianity) will quickly recognize what French is doing. But Smith and Stark write from the academy to explain the church to the academy. French has adopted their historical/sociological methods to explain to Christians that only the religious groups that resist cultural pressures to conform can survive with their faith intact and even appealing to outsiders. (We evangelicals make the same argument about ourselves when criticizing mainline Protestants and Catholics.) Obviously we can learn the same thing about dying to flesh from Jesus himself, which is how French concludes his article.

Nobody here thinks Mormonism is a valid alternative to Christianity. And no one here thinks Mormons have the market cornered on the truth about how to grow in modern America. I do think it's interesting to hear from others who know about Mormonism and question whether the positive picture French paints is accurate. (Though in defense of French, his analysis accords with Smith's studies—the largest-ever survey of youth and religion—which shows that Mormons outpace evangelicals in their commitment and morality.) Still, we should expect that a group that does not know the gospel of Jesus Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit will look better on the outside than the inside. Again, this is what Jesus told us to expect from false religion based on following law.

Hi Mike,

Dr. Martin's definition of "cult," like other contemporary definitions, correctly conveys more recent nuances. Meanings of words change over time depending upon how they are used.

As I said, I was referring to a more 'formal' definition. When you read some of the older Christian authors, historians, scholars, theologians, commentators and pastors, they sometimes refer to Christianity as a cult in a historical sense.

Christianity was a cult according to the classic definition of a cult. It was founded upon and organized around a person, and its teachings departed from the status quo beliefs and traditions of its day, both the Judaizers and pagan Rome.

This is why some of the older writers were careful to distinguish between non-Christian cults and Christianity viewed biblically, legitimately and correctly as a true Jesus cult. We DO worship Christ and follow Him and His teachings in an obsessive, life-changing, all-consuming way (. . . at least we should).

When Christians talk about cults today, they usually have in mind something like you quoted from Dr. Martin: an aberrant group, often founded by and organized around someone other than Christ (such as Mormonism and Joseph Smith) which departs from biblical Christianity. False cults employ deception and/or brainwashing to control people and create conformity and uniformity among their adherents.

Christianity employs (or should employ) truthful, historical revelation (God's word), reason, respect and relationships (both vertical and horizontal) based on faith, hope and love which reflect a diversity of spiritual gifts and service in the body of Christ presented in gratitude to God for His gift of life and freedom from sin's guilt and power.

So your objection is that TGC follows the example of Calvin and St. Paul, both of whom used non-Christian (i.e., pagan) references to make their points?

***You don't honestly think that's why she meant, do you Joe????***

Well, yes I do because that is what she wrote. Susan is saying that Mr. French provided five "human reasonings" and presented them as "biblically viable solutions." Are the points that Mr. French outlined found in the Bible or not?

David,


*** If you are looking for doctrinal direction and instruction in godliness by looking at false religions that's entirely another thing.***

Nothing in Mr. French's article implies that he is looking for "doctrinal direction and instruction in godliness." He is simply pointing out that when non-Christians use methods that used to be the province of Christians, they are likely to achieve.

***. . . and every one of the reference points which he sites from Mormonism are marked by corruption and demonic (not just icky) doctrine and motives.***

I don't think Mr. French would disagree with you about that. However, his point is not "We should be more like Mormons" but rather:

(a) we shouldn't be surprised that Mormonism is growing considering they are using principles that ar e like the Christian church, and

(b) many of our own churches are not doing these things.

?***No, the Mormons haven't stumbled on any insight. Faithfulness in marriage, children as a blessing, unselfishness, evangelism, service in the church, etc. are not Mormon principles discovered by common grace, they are biblical principles clearly expounded and proclaimed in Scripture. ***

Because we can be aware of most of these things outside of scripture, I'd say they fall under common grace. Just because wisdom is mentioned in the Bible does not mean it is only found through special revelation.

However, if you are right, then it merely means that Mormons found these things in the Bible. That would only shore up Mr. French's point that we should be the ones that are known for these things, rather than having non-Christians be models of them.

***They may eat food, enjoy the sunshine and take pleasure in some aspects of marriage by common grace, but make no mistake, their *motives* and *doctrines* backing up all of these practices are, in fact, evil.***

I'll half agree with you. The doctrines are certainly evil. But I think it would be a slander against common grace to say that their motives are necessarily evil. If a nonbeliever loves their child, would we say it is evil? No, we would say they love their child because that is part of God's design. Similarly, I think many Mormons have the right motive—to honor God—but they are doing it wrong by honoring a false conception of the true God.

***Also, your use of Calvin's quote was quite off the mark. Find me a single reference where Calvin called us fools for not looking to a false religion in order to mimic their practices already heralded more purely in Scripture.***

You are making it an either/or, whereas Calvin did not. Much of what Calvin praised the pagans for was—as he noted—clearly found in Scripture. However, he did not say that if it was found in Scripture, then we need not ever reference the pagans.

***What we are objecting to is Mr. French's use of a false religious system as a model to be learned from when in fact the Bible *is* sufficient in every area which Mr. French raises.***

I think you're misunderstanding Mr. French's point. He is not saying "We should learn x, y, and z" from the Mormons. He is saying "Mormons do x, y, an z" and we can learn form their example that we should be doing those things too. If anything his point should be more obvious than objectionable.

Really, if one can borrow from Bonhoeffer, Camus, Kierkegard, and Kafka to make theological points or arguments dealing with Christian living (re: books by TGC authors), why not Joseph Smith?

On a personal note, I'm sick of reading about what Christians can learn from the latest fastest growing cult/false religion. Satan doesn't give a hoot (I self-edited a more colorful expression) if an unsaved person switches between one false religion to another. "Bible believing" Christians need to become "Bible reading and obeying" followers of Jesus, and quit looking elsewhere for the solutions to the church's problems.

Several posters have expressed surprised that this would be on TGC. Given the emphasis on cultural transformationalism, missional church, etc., I am not surprised at all. If the church/Christians is/are to transform the culture they must assess and engage the culture. This just seems like one of the more extreme examples. The problem with cultural transformionalism is that more often than not the culture seems better at transforming the church than the other way around. Worldly mindedness produces nothing but worldliness.

Thanks for the clarification David M.

Thanks Melody!

Did you not read what I wrote? I'm not supporting the church. I'm saying the Mormon church worships a man who didn't exist. The truth about Joseph Smith WOULD set people free because they'd see who he really was.

I get that my comment may be confusing, but if you read everything in context, it SHOULD make sense. :)

No, David M, this was not why the Mormon church was founded. The writings of Joseph Smith arose out of the twisted mind of a deceived man who may very well have been demonically influenced. His teaching is the doctrine of demons and, as Paul said, his "gospel" is no Gospel at all, and worthy only to be condemned.

You wrote,
"The truth of Joseph Smith would set a lot of people free"

My reply:
Truth? Joseph Smith was a liar, plain and simple. He was of his father the devil who is the father of lies. The only thing Mormonism ever delivered to those who died as Mormons is eternal condemnation.

You don't honestly think that's why she meant, do you Joe???? C'mon. No one objecting to this article is saying that. We're objecting to looking to the Mormons for these things when the Bible already addresses these matters in such glorious perfection that peering into the practices of a cult which has corrupt motives and legalistic intents for their outwardly *commendable* mimicking of certain praiseworthy practices is absolutely unnecessary, that's all.

Not going to lie: I was expecting a lot of disagreement with my thoughts, but I'm glad to see there are other people who share in this passion for working with what God has already given us instead of looking elsewhere for help. This is HIS body and we need to trust Him to provide us with answers. The Mormon church was founded because it wanted to be separate from what they viewed as the evil that is "Christianity" yet now they've returned. What can we learn from THAT? The truth of Joseph Smith would set a lot of people free, but sadly, they've whitewashed him into being such a martyr. "One Nation Under Gods" is a great book to pick up if you're interested in church history. It's sizable but full of well-documented evidence and while it is slightly biased (who isn't?), it's not biased to the point of missing the point.

Have a great weekend, everyone, and be safe. Blessings and love to you all. :)

Yes, but Mike, you don't honestly think that a majority of folks in today's American "evangelical church" are *actually* saved??? Yes, Christians can sin and be sinful, but much of the problems today are people who are *Christians* by name only, but who are not actually saved, do not have the Holy Spirit, do not love Christ and are on their way to hell. Many "evangelicals" are nasty people because they're lost. You shouldn't expect any better behavior out of a lost "evangelical" than you would an atheist, in fact, I expect the lost "evangelical" to be nastier, because his/her hypocrisy has got to put them in a bad mood.

***Human reasonings (aside from #1) being presented as biblically viable comparisons/solutions for the church, as if we are a business or sports model are just weird to read here at TGC.***

So you are saying that staying married, sharing our faith, holding to orthodoxy, and asking a lot of the Christian life are *not* biblical solutions?

"Mormons, Catholics, Muslims - they are all counter-cultural. I don't want to be like them. I want to be like Jesus."

That's my feeling. Lumping in NT Wright with the rest of those ideologies confused me, though. (He doesn't have his own religion, haha.) It's the fact that we are basing our FAITH-BASED IDEAS off of other religions instead of looking to Jesus and the full counsel of scripture.

If you look down, you'll see that some people called out the fact that there are statistics that show the Mormon church isn't growing as much as everyone would like to think, which shows why probability and statistics was a great glass to take in high school: there is danger in misusing statistics to prove a point, causing me to always be skeptical. Oh and I'm also an English minor and I think I used that run-on sentence right? haha

Jesus taught that His kingdom was a Spiritual [Holy Spirit] kingdom. Christ now reigns over His church for the progress of His kingdom. He also taught that the world would know His followers because they love one another. The great commandment is to love God and to love one's neighbor. There's a lot to unpack there, but it seems to me the only way to grow the church is to put into practice what Christ and His apostles have already told us in scripture; love God & one another. That sounds simple but no man is up to the task. We need to be faithful to what we have already been given.

Joe, I respectfully disagree with your response above.

Joe, you wrote:
"you seem to imply that we shouldn't use non-orthodox groups as references."

My response:
Joe, that really depends entirely on *what you are referencing.*
If you want to reference the carpeting selection of the local Elks Lodge because you think the colors would look nice in your church building, that's one thing. If you are looking for doctrinal direction and instruction in godliness by looking at false religions that's entirely another thing.

The point is, not a single one of the reference points mentioned in Mr. French's article need to be referenced from Mormon teaching or practice because those same exact reference points (minus the corruption of Mormon doctrine) are already referenced with purity and perfection in the Bible, and every one of the reference points which he sites from Mormonism are marked by corruption and demonic (not just icky) doctrine and motives.

For example, the low rate of divorce among Mormons is not due to anything praiseworthy, but it is due to their legalistic doctrine and their belief that the family will continue post resurrection by populating a new planet where they will be gods. Their still going and end up in hell if they die as a Mormon - married or divorced.

Joe, you wrote:
"It's simply an acknowledgment that they may have stumbled on some insight—aided by common grace—that we are missing."

My response:
No, the Mormons haven't stumbled on any insight. Faithfulness in marriage, children as a blessing, unselfishness, evangelism, service in the church, etc. are not Mormon principles discovered by common grace, they are biblical principles clearly expounded and proclaimed in Scripture. They may eat food, enjoy the sunshine and take pleasure in some aspects of marriage by common grace, but make no mistake, their *motives* and *doctrines* backing up all of these practices are, in fact, evil.

Also, your use of Calvin's quote was quite off the mark. Find me a single reference where Calvin called us fools for not looking to a false religion in order to mimic their practices already heralded more purely in Scripture.

Joe, you wrote:
"Also, I think our side has developed an allergic reaction to anything having to do with "church growth." Too often we assume that if a church is growing they (i.e., preachers we like) are either preaching the pure gospel or they (i.e., preachers we don't like) are selling out to the latest church growth fad. There is surely some middle-ground."

My response:
No, most thinking reformed folks only react against un-biblical means, not neutral or biblical means. Having a website or using microphones, for example, is not the same as looking to a false religion for moral direction and practice. You are over characterizing these responses as being somehow against neutral or biblical means of growth. What we are objecting to is Mr. French's use of a false religious system as a model to be learned from when in fact the Bible *is* sufficient in every area which Mr. French raises.

Rick, you said, "(As a side note, by formal definition, Christianity is a cult since it is founded upon and revolves around an individual: the person of Christ.)"

This may help you out, Dr Walter Martin def. of a cult: "any religious group which differs significantly in some one or more respects as to belief or practice from those religious groups which are regarded as the normative expressions of religion in our total culture.  I may add to this that a cult might also be defined as a group of people gathered about a specific person or person's mis-interpretation of the Bible"