The differences between Mormonism and Christianity

Published on April 17, 2008 By erathoniel In Religion

Mormonism and Christianity vary in many ways. It would not be too big a leap to say they're different religions.

Mormonism teaches that God achieved godhood by living a perfect life. Christianity (and Judaism) preaches that God is an infinite being, and always has been. "As Psalms 90:2 and 93:2 state, God has been God 'from eternity to eternity.'"
Mormonism teaches that God is made of flesh and bones. Christianity (and Judaism) preach that God is an infinite, formless (in that he can take any shape or form, and needs not physically exist) being.
Mormonism teaches there are many gods "There are many Gods. Brigham Young-Journal of Discourses 7:333 "How many Gods there are, I do not know. But there never was a time when there were not Gods." This is directly in contradiction to Judaism and Christianity's teachings that there is only one God, who is, and was, and always will be. "There is only one God. (Dt 6:4; 33:26-27; Isa 43:10; 45:5; 46:9; 1Ti 2:5)"
Mormonism teaches that God takes a wife. "'Implicit in the Christian verity that all men are the spirit children of an Eternal Father is the usually unspoken truth that they are also the offspring of an Eternal Mother. An exalted and glorified Man of Holiness (Moses 6:57) could not be a Father unless a Woman of like glory, perfection, and holiness was associated with him as a Mother' (Mormon Doctrine, 1977 ed., p. 516)" This is never mentioned in the scripture. "The Godhead determined to make man in their image, not to procreate spirit children (Ge 1:26). Nowhere does Scripture even hint at the existence of an Eternal Mother."
Mormonism believes the following: "God would stop being God if intelligences stopped supporting him as God.", where as Christianity teaches that God is infinite. "God is not God unless He is all-powerful, all knowing, absolutely in charge. If God exists only as God because of support given from other intelligent forms, He is not God at all (Isa 44:6; Ro 3:4; Rev 1:8; 21:6; 22:13) God is unchangingly omnipotent, and no purpose of His can be thwarted. He is not overruled by anyone (Ge 17:1; Job 36:22-23; 42:2; Isa 14:26-27; 40:13-14; Jer 32:27; Mt 19:26; Lk 1:37; Ac 17:24-25; Rev 19:6)".
Mormonism believes that "Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be" (D&C 93:29)" I don't need a reference (Try the first page of Genesis) to disprove this.

There you go. Big font. Follow the Article Link for more. Yes, I did take most everything from there, but as a fellow brother in Christ, with attribution to them, I believe that it is a good, rather than a wrong to spread infomation to save the lost sheep in the world.

Comments (Page 3)

Jythier

on Apr 18, 2008

I thought Joseph Smith wrote the book of Mormon?

erathoniel

on Apr 18, 2008

@ Cedarbird: I'm pretty sure that it was a mainstream Christian leader, in the end. Second, no, the books were written in the colonial era. Not translated, written.

@ Jythier: Yes, they were written by Joseph Smith, the "translated" was just his way of trying to tell a convincing story.

I present: A VIDEO!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zy0d1HbItOo

Copy and paste!

ParaTed2k

on Apr 18, 2008

erathoniel:

One of the Apostles said that scripture ended with Revelations. All the books contained in the Book of Mormon were written in the Colonial Era or later.

Actually, this is wrong also. John the Revelator did at the end of the Book of Revelation, but he was just talking about his book. He wasn't the one who decided the Book of Revelation should be the last book of the New Testament.

2 Ye shall not aadd unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

Using the same logic, should we disregard everything after Deuteronomy?

ParaTed2k

on Apr 18, 2008

Jythier:

I thought Joseph Smith wrote the book of Mormon?

At the time Joseph Smith would have been writing the Boof of Mormon he was a barely literate farm boy. He could not have read the Book of Mormon, much less wrote it.

erathoniel:

I'm pretty sure that it was a mainstream Christian leader, in the end. Second, no, the books were written in the colonial era. Not translated, written.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong. But that's just my opinion (which doesn't count any more or less than yours or whoever happens to be in that video).

Why don't you go to the source instead of other people? Ask Our Heavenly Father if Joseph Smith was a prophet. Ask Him if the Book of Mormon is his word.

"but ask in faith, nothing wavering..." (James 1:6)

What do you have to lose?

erathoniel

on Apr 18, 2008

I did. He said no, a long time ago.

ParaTed2k

on Apr 18, 2008

I did. He said no, a long time ago.

Fair enough, so why keep reading what other mere men have to say about it?

Btw, I'm still waiting for your thoughts on the misrepresentations. If you did and I missed it, let me know. I'm not asking you to defend them or try to explain them away, since they are not your doing. I'm just curious to know what you think.

OckhamsRazor

on Apr 18, 2008

I'm not reading all of this. At a probability of about 99%, I've already read it in other threads.

But I am going to comment on one thing I saw.

ParaTed2k:

That way, you can decide for yourself based on actual facts, not half truths and people who cut quotes short because the rest of the verse doesn't fit their propaganda.

Bravo, Ted.

Cedarbird

on Apr 18, 2008

I'm pretty sure you're wrong.

Me too.

But you are entitled to your opinion, just like we are.

By the way, that is the stupidest, most inaccurate thing I've ever witnessed. It was so ridiculous I couldn't even get more than two minutes into it. There is no credibility to that cartoon at all, and yeah, YouTube? Not the place to go for facts.

Tova7

on Apr 18, 2008

Hey Cedar....I've seen that cartoon before...could you or Ted or SC tell me the inaccuracies in it? I'm no Mormon scholar, but when I saw it I wondered...is all of it bogus, or some parts? Like I said, no Mormon scholar here so I don't know what's real and what's sci-fi, ya know?

It's an interesting take on the world and gods...and what's up with all the SEX??? Sounds like a teenage boy wrote the script to it!

ParaTed2k

on Apr 18, 2008

Sounds like a teenage boy wrote the script to it!

Worse, a propaganda artist with nothing better to do.

Sorry, I won't be able to tell you about inaccuracies on it. I won't bother dagging myself through the cesspool. I don't go to Christians to learn about Muslims, or Mormons to learn about Jews, so why would I go to a cartoon to learn about my own denomination?

Like Ockham said, in all probability, it's information I've read or heard before... besides, why waist my time when I know where to go to find information about the LDS church that is 100% accurate?

Tova7

on Apr 18, 2008

I don't go to Christians to learn about Muslims, or Mormons to learn about Jews, so why would I go to a cartoon to learn about my own denomination?

Um, really surprised to hear you say this Ted. I thought it was a good forum for you to clear up misconceptions.

lulapilgrim

on Apr 18, 2008

One of the Apostles said that scripture ended with Revelations.

Primarily, Revelation is a body of truth that is made known through God's unfolding plan. The nature of God's written Revelation can be seen in both the OT and the NT.

The Judeo-Christian revelation was given progressively in the course of centuries. St.Thomas distinguishes 3 great periods of sacred history ----before the Mosaic law, under the Law and under grace----these he connects with the great revelations made to Abraham, Moses and the Apostles by reason of their immediate contact with the Incarnate Word 1St.John 1:1, and their Pentecostal experience.

Revelation from its inception was public in that it was addressed not to individuals but to a whole people. The Israelite revelation in the OT was directed to a single nation, and Christianity to all mankind. From a Christian pov the OT appears as totally ordered toward Christ and the Church by way of type and prophecy. Through the teaching and life of Christ including His Passion and Resurrection, God communicates His message of pardon and reconciliation towards mankind.

It's true, Revelation was closed when St.John, the last Apostle, died. This by no means has a negative menaing that God decided to say nothing more. No far from it. It has a positive aspect inasmuch as God had so completely expressed Himself in the Christ event that anything else would be superfluous.

Although CHristian revelation was complete in Apostolic times, much remains to be done by way clarification. So long as man remains on earth, he must be content to walk by faith, hope and charity, reverently inclining his mind and will before God.

lulapilgrim

on Apr 18, 2008

If I'm correct, the Church of LDS belileve that their prophets, beginning with Joseph Smith, received new revelation from God the Father Himself and Jesus Christ Himself as two separate Beings.

Again, St.Thomas warned that prophetic public revelation insofar as it is ordered to doctrine ceased with the death of the last Apostle but that private revelations insofar as it is a directive of human actions, will always continue.

At the same time, he warned of the dangers of delusion, fraud, exaggeration, etc. of private reports and they should be treated with great caution. As to the proofs of private revelations, they should contain no absurdity or nothing contrary to the Christian faith and morals.

Texas Wahine

on Apr 19, 2008

Again, St.Thomas warned that prophetic public revelation insofar as it is ordered to doctrine ceased with the death of the last Apostle but that private revelations insofar as it is a directive of human actions, will always continue.

Scriptures, please?

All this about what belongs in the Bible and what does not is ridiculous to me. So much depends on it, and yet, it is very muddled as to what "counts" and what does not.

Big Fat Daddy

on Apr 19, 2008

In John 17:3 we are told that life eternal is to know God and Jesus Christ whom he has sent.

So in whose best interest is it to keep confusion on the earth as to the true nature of God? Who benefits?

Compare the "simplicity" of the Nicene Creed with the description of God in Joseph Smith's first vision.

Some argue that it is not possible for us to "know God". It is too hard for mortals to grasp. We are told that we do not see things the way God sees them, but it would not make sense for us to be told that our eternal life is based on knowledge of God then deny us the faculty to arrive at that knowledge.

One truth we all seem to agree on is that Satan is the bad guy and wants us to be as miserable as he is. So again, who benefits from the confusion? When you look at this with sobriety, putting all preconceived notions aside, the simplest answer just feels right...so which is easier for you to understand?

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!