Mormons: Chrstians? Polytheists? Both?

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
earlier he claimed that christianity is a sect of judaism,

No, I didn't. You just didn't follow the conversation very well. I said that when the Christians first started they were a sect of Judaism. Only later did they start calling themselves a separate religion and it is only because they chose to do so that we don't call them Jews today.

Originally posted by twhitehead
It has to do with the fact that people do not own words. Many people (Void Spirit included) think they personally own the word 'Christian' and have the right to decide who is a Christian and who is not. Of course he tries to justify it by making up definitions on the spur of the moment to exclude people he doesn't want included.
For example when it came ...[text shortened]... istence of 'kinds' which they then chop and change each time they get backed into a corner.

It is the evolutionists that claim kinds change, not the creationists. They claim kinds can change to other kinds. We creationists say they don't change. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
It is the evolutionists that claim kinds change, not the creationists. They claim kinds can change to other kinds. We creationists say they don't change. 😏

I didn't say creationists claim kinds change, I said creationists change the definition of 'kind'.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I didn't say creationists claim kinds change, I said creationists change the definition of 'kind'.

I am a creationists and don't recall changing the definition of kinds. It has always been the same definition as used in Genesis for me.

HalleluYah ! Praise the Lord! Holy! Holy! Holy!

P.S. Animals reproduce after their own kind as God created them. Animals do not evolve into a different kind from what God made them. They can adapt, but always remain the same kind. In other words, a cat will not change into a dog or a horse.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I am a creationists and don't recall changing the definition of kinds.

That is because you have never actually given a usable definition of 'kind'.

I have to agree and state that techincally speaking the Mormons are not Christian but it's the same thing as with the JW's every cult starts with a fundamental Mis-Understanding of who Christ is and the nature of God. Also as with any cult they trivialize the major tenants of the faith yet elevate smaller tenants and make doctrines from those smaller points. Also on a certain level who am I to judge? I question my faith everyday



Manny

Originally posted by menace71
Also as with any cult they trivialize the major tenants of the faith yet elevate smaller tenants and make doctrines from those smaller points.

Essentially, a cult is any denomination that you don't agree with enough to want to be identified with. Of course your denomination is a 'cult' as far as they are concerned. - although very large groups tend to get away with gaining enough respectability to shed the 'cult' status purely by merit of their size. I saw an article in the Guardian regarding the 'Moonies' and it essentially said they started off as a 'cult' but have now grown into a respectable denomination/religion.

Originally posted by twhitehead
No, I didn't. You just didn't follow the conversation very well. I said that when the Christians first started they were a sect of Judaism. Only later did they start calling themselves a separate religion and it is only because they chose to do so that we don't call them Jews today.

you're talking about the direct disciples of christ. they weren't christians since christianity didn't exist at that time, they still considered themselves jews.

somewhere along the line, christianity branched out and those who converted were no longer jews.

christian is mentioned twice in the new testament, the fist is in peter, when a "christian" is seen as a distinct entity that is not a jew. and the second is when agrippa is telling paul that he is not easy to persuade him to become christian (not a jew!)

at any given time, it would be complete absurdity for someone to claim to belong to two exclusive religions. you are either a christian or a jew, you can not be both in the same way you cannot be both a christian and a muslim or a muslim and a jew. i am not redefining what it means to belong to a religion. you are doing that.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
you're talking about the direct disciples of christ. they weren't christians since christianity didn't exist at that time, they still considered themselves jews.

somewhere along the line, christianity branched out and those who converted were no longer jews.

So one day a group of Jews magically transformed into Christians, or did they do it on different days, or were only new converts Christians and their leaders for the time being were still Jews (and not Christian). Please clarify as you say quite clearly that at no point would it have been possible for someone to be both Christian and Jew.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
at any given time, it would be complete absurdity for someone to claim to belong to two exclusive religions. you are either a christian or a jew, you can not be both in the same way you cannot be both a christian and a muslim or a muslim and a jew.

Originally posted by menace71
I have to agree and state that techincally speaking the Mormons are not Christian but it's the same thing as with the JW's every cult starts with a fundamental Mis-Understanding of who Christ is and the nature of God. Also as with any cult they trivialize the major tenants of the faith yet elevate smaller tenants and make doctrines from those smaller points. Also on a certain level who am I to judge? I question my faith everyday



Manny

Yeah I agree with a bit of thought on that. I guess when I think of cult in the classic sense I think of Jim Jones or David Karesh or Applewhite. One dominating person who takes control and people follow like sheep



Manny

Originally posted by twhitehead
Essentially, a cult is any denomination that you don't agree with enough to want to be identified with. Of course your denomination is a 'cult' as far as they are concerned. - although very large groups tend to get away with gaining enough respectability to shed the 'cult' status purely by merit of their size. I saw an article in the Guardian regarding t ey started off as a 'cult' but have now grown into a respectable denomination/religion.

Are you kidding? The "Moomies" a respectable denomination/religion? May God forbid.

P.S. Or "Moonies", whatever. Ha ha ha 😀

Originally posted by twhitehead
So one day a group of Jews magically transformed into Christians, or did they do it on different days, or were only new converts Christians and their leaders for the time being were still Jews (and not Christian). Please clarify as you say quite clearly that at no point would it have been possible for someone to be both Christian and Jew.

[i]Originally ...[text shortened]... t be both in the same way you cannot be both a christian and a muslim or a muslim and a jew.[/b]

what more clarification do you need? at no point would anyone be both christian and jew. early on there were jews who followed someone called jesus christ whom they considered to be a prophet of the jews. they were not christian as the religion of christianity did not exist.

at some point after his death, allegedly on ~33CE, the religion was formed by his disciples and they began converting people to christianity. the earliest manuscripts we have are paul's epistles and the earliest of those is dated ~51CE. paul started out as a jew, claimed to have persecuted christians before becoming a convert, so the religion of christianity must have formed and grown between these dates.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
what more clarification do you need? at no point would anyone be both christian and jew. early on there were jews who followed someone called jesus christ whom they considered to be a prophet of the jews. they were not christian as the religion of christianity did not exist.

at some point after his death, allegedly on ~33CE, the religion was formed ...[text shortened]... ming a convert, so the religion of christianity must have formed and grown between these dates.

The only real difference in the Jews that believe in Christianity and the Jews that believe in Judaism is the absence of the Messiah (Christ) from Judaism. Christ has not come yet in Judaism.

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

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
at some point after his death, allegedly on ~33CE, the religion was formed by his disciples and they began converting people to christianity. the earliest manuscripts we have are paul's epistles and the earliest of those is dated ~51CE. paul started out as a jew, claimed to have persecuted christians before becoming a convert, so the religion of christianity must have formed and grown between these dates.

So how did these disciples 'form' a religion? They decided to call themselves something new? They started believing something new? They stopped believing something about Judaism?
I am trying to understand how exactly you define a religion and how someone gets categorised. Right now you seem to be suggesting that the Christian religion exists because its early followers chose to call themselves Christian and others called them Christian - but this contradicts your earlier claims that what people call themselves is of little relevance.
In fact you cite as evidence for your recent claim, what people called them and what they called themselves yet you earlier claimed this is irrelevant. If I can find some references to people calling Mormons 'Christian' then will that make them Christian? Make up your mind!

Originally posted by twhitehead
So how did these disciples 'form' a religion? They decided to call themselves something new? They started believing something new? They stopped believing something about Judaism?

they started believing something new. the disciples began preaching a new religion and people converted into it. the earliest people to convert were jews. those that converted abandoned judaism and became christian.

I am trying to understand how exactly you define a religion and how someone gets categorised. Right now you seem to be suggesting that the Christian religion exists because its early followers chose to call themselves Christian and others called them Christian - but this contradicts your earlier claims that what people call themselves is of little relevance.

In fact you cite as evidence for your recent claim, what people called them and what they called themselves yet you earlier claimed this is irrelevant. If I can find some references to people calling Mormons 'Christian' then will that make them Christian? Make up your mind!

no contradiction. what people choose to call themselves remains irrelevant. your inability to understand the simple concept that people who convert from one religion to another abandon their original religion does not create a contradiction in what i have stated from the start.