• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Questions about Christianity and Mormonism

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
You cannot be a progressive and be a republican. You cannot be carrots and say that you are corn. You cannot be a henotheist and say that you are monotheist.
So do you believe that the Apostle Paul was a henotheist or a monotheist?
 
Last edited:

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
The nature of God was decided by majority vote and dissenters were exiled. And somehow, the decision made at that one council has come to define Christianity in some people's minds. How pathetic.
I have no stake in this debate. You make a very interesting point, so I'm wondering: How do you think the debate should have been settled? Should it have even been settled at all?
 

Dropship

Member
Really? While monogamy has always been the norm in Jewish and Christian societies, I must have missed where the Bible says, "Don't do that stuff." Could you point me to the precise chapter and verse in which we are told that?

Well Jesus did say "wife" and not the plural "wives"..;)
"...at the beginning the Creator made them male and female, and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh' So they are no longer two, but one." (Matt 19:4)

PS- I hear that even today some Mormon men have more than one wife, so it's definitely the naughty step for them.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
I have no stake in this debate. You make a very interesting point, so I'm wondering: How do you think the debate should have been settled? Should it have even been settled at all?
Actually, I don't think it should even have come to that. I don't believe that any of the doctrines being promulgated at Nicaea rightly explained the nature of God or the relationship between the Father and the Son. I believe that by that time, a correct understanding of the nature of God had long since been lost, and that this would not likely have happened had the Apostles Jesus ordained (and their successors) been allowed to continue to exist as an authoritative body that maintained the integrity of Christian doctrine.

By the time of these early councils and the creeds that resulted from them, the Christians who were in any positions of authority had been educated in Greek philosophical thought. They presumed that God had to fit into the neo-platonic definitions of what God must be in order to be called "God." The Jewish converts to Christianity who personally knew either Jesus or His Apostles wouldn't have even been asking these questions. They knew who God the Father was and they knew who His Son was, and they didn't need any high-falutin Greek philosophers telling them anything about their Creator. The concepts argued in these early councils would have been completely foreign to Jesus' contemporaries, and I can almost hear them pleading, "Can't we just focus on being His disciples?" I also don't believe that the Holy Ghost was present at any of those early councils. They were politically motivated because there was absolutely no separation of church and state at that point. Determining religious doctrine based on majority vote is absurd, no matter which way the final decision ends up. It was a bunch of hot-headed men, each determined to have their own way. I'm not saying they weren't well-intentioned, but good intentions don't always lead to the best results.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
But why do you think Mormons would identify as Christians
I honestly do not understand why Mormons have this desire to call themselves Christians. They reject the Christian church has being apostate. So why try to use the same label? It really makes no sense to me. I'm not criticizing them for making a break from mainstream Crhstianity -- people will believe what they want to believe. I'm just baffled by the desire on their part to keep the label that applies to something they essentially reject.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Well Jesus did say "wife" and not the plural "wives"..;)
"...at the beginning the Creator made them male and female, and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh' So they are no longer two, but one." (Matt 19:4)
So God was upset with Abraham and many of the other Old Testament prophets but decided not to say anything?

PS- I hear that even today some Mormon men have more than one wife, so it's definitely the naughty step for them.
Well, that just goes to show you that you shouldn't believe everything you hear. Polygamy was formally discontinued some 131 years ago. Today, any member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who is found to be in a polygamous relationship is promptly excommunicated. There are NO exceptions.
 

Dropship

Member
..Today, any member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who is found to be in a polygamous relationship is promptly excommunicated. There are NO exceptions.

Thanks, and incidentally why are there no Mormon women priests?
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
I honestly do not understand why Mormons have this desire to call themselves Christians. They reject the Christian church has being apostate. So why try to use the same label? It really makes no sense to me. I'm not criticizing them for making a break from mainstream Crhstianity -- people will believe what they want to believe. I'm just baffled by the desire on their part to keep the label that applies to something they essentially reject.
Are you being intentionally obtuse, or what? We do not reject Jesus Christ. He is our Lord and Savior. Seriously, it's not rocket science. We reject the fourth- and fifth-century creeds that attempt to define the nature of God and the relationship between the Father and the Son. We do not claim to be part of traditional Christianity (those folks who believe that 1 + 1 + 1 = 1), but we do claim to be Christians and we have every right to do so -- with or without your blessing.

And for the record, don't think I haven't noticed that you continue to ignore the questions I've asked you very directly, because I haven't. And when you get around to actually addressing them, here's another one for you: Why do Reform Jews still have a desire to call themselves Jews? Is it just a cultural thing or what? They clearly reject much of what Orthodox Jews still teach, and Orthodox Jews have been around for a lot longer than any other kinds of Jews.
 
Last edited:

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Thanks, and incidentally why are there no Mormon women priests?
Probably for the same reason there were no women priests in the first-century church Jesus Christ personally established, and for the same reason there aren't any Catholic or Orthodox women priests either.
 

Dropship

Member
Probably for the same reason there were no women priests in the first-century church Jesus Christ personally established, and for the same reason there aren't any Catholic or Orthodox women priests either.

Women were up there strutting their stuff with the men in the early Christian churches..:)-
The evangelist Philip had four daughters who were preachers;
The early Christian sect in Phrygia was led by Montanus and two preachers, Priscilla and Maximilla..
And Paul paid glowing tributes to women -
"I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church in Cenchrea..she has been a great help to many people, including me..
Greet Priscilla , my fellow worker in Christ Jesus, she risked her life for me.
Greet Mary, who worked very hard for you..
Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa and Persis, those women who work hard in the Lord.
Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother, who has been a mother to me, too.
Greet Julia.." (Romans ch 16)


And he reminds us -
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28 )

GO GIRLS..:)-
"In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. On my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will speak." (Joel 2:28-32)

As for Catholicism, perhaps the male priests simply don't like girls..;)

rel-pope-women.jpg
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Women were up there strutting their stuff with the men in the early Christian churches..:)-
The evangelist Philip had four daughters who were preachers;
The early Christian sect in Phrygia was led by Montanus and two preachers, Priscilla and Maximilla..
And Paul paid glowing tributes to women -
"I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church in Cenchrea..she has been a great help to many people, including me..
Greet Priscilla , my fellow worker in Christ Jesus, she risked her life for me.
Greet Mary, who worked very hard for you..
Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa and Persis, those women who work hard in the Lord.
Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother, who has been a mother to me, too.
Greet Julia.." (Romans ch 16)
Ah... you said "priests" but you were actually thinking "preachers." There are actually a great many Mormon women who preach the gospel, and they don't preach to just other women, but to men, too. They just aren't "priests" or "priestesses."

And he reminds us -
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28 )

GO GIRLS..:)-
"In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. On my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will speak." (Joel 2:28-32)
Actually, the Book of Mormon says something along the same lines... "He inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile."

I honestly have no really strong feelings for or against women holding the priesthood. I guess I've just never felt particularly threatened by an all male priesthood, but I can understand why some women might be. When I hear a man speaking out on behalf of women's equality, though, I do appreciate it. So thank you for caring.
 

Dropship

Member
At the crucifixion some of the disciples ran away in fear of the Romans, but women stuck with him to the end..



It's as if he knew they'd be there for him, which is why he was always there for them-

 

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Thank you.

The second sentence literally says this:

“...we don’t believe in the traditional concept of the Trinity.”

This tells us which explanation of the Trinity they do not believe in.
Believing in the traditional concept of the Trinity is NOT a requirement for being a Christian. Many Christians do not accept that concept. There is NO explanation of the trinity that all Christians must agree on.

Mormons believe in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They believe Jesus is Savior. That makes them Christians.
Those who believe in the Trinity are Christian. Those who don’t are pretenders.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
We do not reject Jesus Christ. He is our Lord and Savior. Seriously, it's not rocket science. We reject the fourth- and fifth-century creeds that attempt to define the nature of God and the relationship between the Father and the Son. We do not claim to be part of traditional Christianity (those folks who believe that 1 + 1 + 1 = 1), but we do claim to be Christians and we have every right to do so -- with or without your blessing.

And for the record, don't think I haven't noticed that you continue to ignore the questions I've asked you very directly,
I've started ignoring more posts in this thread, both from you and from others, simply because I don't want to spend a lot of my day talking aobut Trinitarianism, a doctrine I find repugnant. This thread is simply starting to demand more effort than I'm wiling to put into it.

Why do Reform Jews still have a desire to call themselves Jews?
I am reluctant to speak for Reform Jews, since I am not personally Reform -- I'm non-denominational, just a regular ol' Jew who feels at home praying with ANY group of Jews. However, I will say just a couple things.

A Jew is a Jew because they are part of the People of Israel. It's a tribal thing, not a religious thing. There are in fact Jews who are atheists and who do not practice Judaism at all.

Judaism is basically the religion of the Jews. It is monotheistic (to a degree that something like Trinitarianism is compeltely unacceptable to us). Our primary text is the Torah, although it would not be Judaism if it did not also value the Tanakh as a whole, the Talmud in particular, and the words of the sages. Reform Judaism falls into that understanding. The differences between Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox are clearly denominational divisions, not the creation of other religions.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
I've started ignoring more posts in this thread, both from you and from others, simply because I don't want to spend a lot of my day talking about Trinitarianism, a doctrine I find repugnant. This thread is simply starting to demand more effort than I'm wiling to put into it.
I can certainly understand not wanting to put effort into a thread regarding a doctrine you find repugnant. What I don't get is why you have zeroed in on a doctrine that didn't even exist for over 300 years after Jesus' death to determine who ought to be able to call themselves a Christian. Just seems that you could have found something a lot more relevant to what Jesus actually taught.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I can certainly understand not wanting to put effort into a thread regarding a doctrine you find repugnant. What I don't get is why you have zeroed in on a doctrine that didn't even exist for over 300 years after Jesus' death to determine who ought to be able to call themselves a Christian. Just seems that you could have found something a lot more relevant to what Jesus actually taught.
As I have said before, you oversimplify. I gave you the example of Tertullian, the second century Chrsitan who fought against modalism and promoted a proto-trinitarianism.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
As I have said before, you oversimplify. I gave you the example of Tertullian, the second century Chrsitan who fought against modalism and promoted a proto-trinitarianism.
I have no idea as to how that example proves that I've oversimplified anything at all.
 
Top