4 ms·

To be fair, others label the LDS as "unChristian" as well, with solid reasoning. For example, the Catholic Church rejects LDS baptism as invalid. That alone mak

To be fair, others label the LDS as "unChristian" as well, with solid reasoning. For example, the Catholic Church rejects LDS baptism as invalid. That alone makes them a non-Christian. For purposes of marriage between an LDS member and a Catholic, that is a "Disparity of Cult" case that you would also see with a Muslim or Hindu. LDS profess Christ, to be sure, and they adhere to OT/NT conservative values, and outwardly seem like nice Christian people. But they also embrace a "new Gospel" with extra books beyond the Christian canon that change the whole message. And, if you pay attention to their terminology while they speak at length, you may eventually realize that the LDS use words that have completely different meanings from the ways other Christians use words. If you've changed the underlying definitions and then speak in the same way, you're saying completely different things to the in-group without outsiders knowing the difference. The LDS sect is fundamentally "henotheistic" rather than mono- or poly-. They literally believe that Jesus and God the Father are/were separate celestial gods, and they literally believe that every man can become a god of his own celestial kingdom, with a minimum of one celestial wife and celestial children to accompany them for the rest of eternity. They've taken major features of Judaic Temple worship, mixed in a good deal of Freemasonry, and come up with something that is far beyond Christianity as any Christian knows it.

mrkstu 4y ago
There is additional doctrine, beyond question. It is a church that is open to further revelation equal to that which came from biblical apostles. There is, however, nothing incompatible with Christian worship prior to the Nicean creed. Definitely post-Nicean it is a heretical sect vs mainline Christianity, but so is all of non-Catholic/Orthodox Christianity on some point or another if you cite the Catholics as the authority, if only on the issue of who's in charge. There is plenty in the Bible to support a henotheistic view of Godhood, so it isn't extra-Biblical/Christian, just not the enforced POV post-Nicea.
- wl 4y ago
  Yes, you can find hints of henotheism in certain parts of the Hebrew scriptures. However, henotheism in Judaism had died out by the time Christianity developed. It's not something found in the New Testament.
- pseudalopex 4y ago
  Catholic dogma classifies Protestants heretical Christians and Mormons not Christians. The Council of Nicaea codified already dominant rejection of henotheism.
  - NoZebra120vClip 4y ago
    > Catholic dogma classifies Protestants heretical Christians No, it actually does nothing of the kind.
    - dragonwriter 4y ago
      Teaching which was not dogma once did, though the current teaching is more nuanced (and not just in the negative sense of recognizing that some Protestants are not validly baptised and therefore cannot be heretics regardless of their beliefs.)
      - pseudalopex 4y ago
        I forgot dogma has a more specific meaning in Catholicism. My understanding of current teaching is Protestant beliefs are material heresy but not formal heresy. Please correct if I am mistaken.
        dragonwriter 4y ago
        > My understanding of current teaching is Protestant beliefs are material heresy but not formal heresy. Beliefs, as such, cannot be distinguished as formal or material heresy, because if a belief contradicts a necessary belief of the Catholic faith, whether a person holding it engages in formal or material heresy depends on other aspects of the individual heretics relationship with the belief, not the content of the belief. And the Church doesn’t hold that “Protestant beliefs” as a class are heretical for the baptized to hold. There are beliefs within the Protestant community that the Church holds to contradict necessary elements of the Catholic faith so as to be capable of being heresies when held in the requisite circumstances, sure. Also, there’s an evolving view both theologically – which kind of follows on practical treatment – that the doctrinal divisions between the Catholic Church and the Protestant Churches, as well as those between the Catholic Church and Eastern and Oriental Orthodox are, in general, as relates to (even validly baptized) members of the respective communities of a distinct theological character from heresy (which is essentially the religious equivalent of “treason”), even if heresy was the right frame early in the respective splits. This provides a theological reinforcement for (and in some respects follows from) efforts focusing on dialogue, clarification, and resolution of disputes rather than condemnation, which have made some progress in (in the case of the Protestant direction) both the Anglican-Catholic and Lutheran-Catholic dialogues.

mrkstu 4y ago

There is additional doctrine, beyond question. It is a church that is open to further revelation equal to that which came from biblical apostles. There is, however, nothing incompatible with Christian worship prior to the Nicean creed. Definitely post-Nicean it is a heretical sect vs mainline Christianity, but so is all of non-Catholic/Orthodox Christianity on some point or another if you cite the Catholics as the authority, if only on the issue of who's in charge. There is plenty in the Bible to support a henotheistic view of Godhood, so it isn't extra-Biblical/Christian, just not the enforced POV post-Nicea.

wl 4y ago
Yes, you can find hints of henotheism in certain parts of the Hebrew scriptures. However, henotheism in Judaism had died out by the time Christianity developed. It's not something found in the New Testament.
pseudalopex 4y ago
Catholic dogma classifies Protestants heretical Christians and Mormons not Christians. The Council of Nicaea codified already dominant rejection of henotheism.
- NoZebra120vClip 4y ago
  > Catholic dogma classifies Protestants heretical Christians No, it actually does nothing of the kind.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    Teaching which was not dogma once did, though the current teaching is more nuanced (and not just in the negative sense of recognizing that some Protestants are not validly baptised and therefore cannot be heretics regardless of their beliefs.)
    - pseudalopex 4y ago
      I forgot dogma has a more specific meaning in Catholicism. My understanding of current teaching is Protestant beliefs are material heresy but not formal heresy. Please correct if I am mistaken.
      - dragonwriter 4y ago
        > My understanding of current teaching is Protestant beliefs are material heresy but not formal heresy. Beliefs, as such, cannot be distinguished as formal or material heresy, because if a belief contradicts a necessary belief of the Catholic faith, whether a person holding it engages in formal or material heresy depends on other aspects of the individual heretics relationship with the belief, not the content of the belief. And the Church doesn’t hold that “Protestant beliefs” as a class are heretical for the baptized to hold. There are beliefs within the Protestant community that the Church holds to contradict necessary elements of the Catholic faith so as to be capable of being heresies when held in the requisite circumstances, sure. Also, there’s an evolving view both theologically – which kind of follows on practical treatment – that the doctrinal divisions between the Catholic Church and the Protestant Churches, as well as those between the Catholic Church and Eastern and Oriental Orthodox are, in general, as relates to (even validly baptized) members of the respective communities of a distinct theological character from heresy (which is essentially the religious equivalent of “treason”), even if heresy was the right frame early in the respective splits. This provides a theological reinforcement for (and in some respects follows from) efforts focusing on dialogue, clarification, and resolution of disputes rather than condemnation, which have made some progress in (in the case of the Protestant direction) both the Anglican-Catholic and Lutheran-Catholic dialogues.