r/wikipedia • u/laybs1 • 2d ago
Mormonism and Nicene Christianity have a complex theological, historical, and sociological relationship. Some Christian sects consider Mormonism non-Christian. Scholars of religion debate if Mormonism is a separate branch of Christianity or a "fourth Abrahamic religion".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonism_and_Nicene_Christianity89
u/BayTranscendentalist 2d ago
Mormonism’s origin story is so insanely racist it’s funny
20
u/Ironside_Grey 2d ago
It's also so insanely idiotic. «Yes an angel gave me these golden tablets that I translated with a rock and that says I am a prophet and can have 20 wives no you cannot see them you heretic and also the translations were stolen by a heretic to prove I made it up by not being able to re-translate the tablets again the same way but that's fine because the angel said I wasn't allowed to translate that part again anyway but there was fortunately another part I could translate and would you look at that it also says I can have 20 wives».
How is this a part of Christianity any more than some cult where its leader claims to be Jesus?
3
u/Necessary-Reading605 1d ago
And many instances of forced marriages that should be considered rape. Even already married women weren’t exempt
27
u/John-Mandeville 2d ago
Such an interesting religion. The beliefs that God made the universe with preexisting materials, and that even his omnipotence is limited by universal principles of justice, do seem to imply a hierarchy of gods, with men who become gods under him and some greater god existing beyond him.
22
u/aftertheradar 2d ago
the us should have stamped them out when they had the chance instead of letting them infiltrate the state governments of half of the west like they did
it spent upwards of 4 decades fighting wars in the middle east at least partially justified on the grounds of combatting religious extremism, and turned a blind eye to the growing domestic religious extremism it had let fester in its own backyard.
2
u/Famous-Echo9347 15h ago
Probably because we have religious freedom enshrined in the constitution. You can't just whipe out a religion because you think it's annoying
1
u/aftertheradar 15h ago
i don't think it's annoying, i think it's dangerous. And i think allowing mormons and other radical evangelical christian-adjacent cults to freely participate in the local, federal, and state governments is directly causing more problems based on these groups wanting to remove and infringe on the rights of others, including freedom of religion.
1
u/Famous-Echo9347 15h ago
Lol so your suggestion is what? Genocide? Forced conversion?
0
u/aftertheradar 15h ago
stronger laws and safeguards to prevent using religious beliefs to infringe on the rights and freedoms of others for a start, followed by stronger secular education for children who grow up in predominantly evangelical or mormon communities.
2
u/Famous-Echo9347 15h ago
stronger laws and safeguards to prevent using religious beliefs to infringe on the rights and freedoms of others for a start
The 1st Amendment of the united states constitution forbids laws respecting an establishment of religion; prohibiting the free exercise of religion; or abridging the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances.
What stronger laws or barriers would you suggest?
followed by stronger secular education for children who grow up in predominantly evangelical or mormon communities.
What do you mean by this, "stronger secular education" no public school I've ever been to in the United States has taught children to believe a certain religion. You can't get more secular than that, really
0
12
u/yuukanna 2d ago
As someone raised Mormon who is something of an Athiest now… I think the debate on whether or not Mormonism is Christian is pointless. There is little difference, Mormonism just adds a little more mythology to what is already there.
In the end, it feels like debating if the live action X-men movies and the animated series are the same Marvel universe… doesn’t really matter, it’s all fiction.
7
u/Haunting-Detail2025 2d ago
That’s just…not true. There are major, foundational level differences between Christine doctrine that Catholics and Protestants and orthodox followers accept that Mormonism doesn’t and vice versa.
Those Christian denominations all share core beliefs like the Trinity, the Bible as the sole holy scripture, and Jesus as eternally divine. Mormonism does not - it teaches that God the Father has a physical body, that Jesus and Satan are spirit brothers, and that people can eventually become gods themselves, along with using a book that has many chapters no other Christian sect remotely accepts.
2
u/PteroFractal27 1d ago
Nitpick, but the whole “Jesus and Satan are spirit brothers” thing is true but INCREDIBLY misleading and will result in any Mormon ceasing to listen to you.
They believe that literally all spirits are children of God. Yeah, that includes Jesus and Satan. And you, and me, and Hitler, and Ghandi, and that one Sumerian that sold shitty copper. Source: was raised Mormon.
That’s why they refer to each other as “Brother X” or “Sister Y”. Because they think all of us are literally spirit brothers and sisters.
So honing in on Jesus and Satan being brothers is a common thing other religious people do in an attempt to discredit Mormons, but it’s quite intellectually dishonest.
0
u/yuukanna 2d ago
Just sharing my perspective / opinion. One mythology is the same as another at a long distance view.
It feels silly to view two parties arguing over “truth” that is completely subjective. When you aren’t party to either side, it’s like one party saying the earth is flat and another saying it’s a triangle…
To say that they are different because one believes in pointier geometry sounds silly from this perspective because they both seem to have built their ideas on the same fallacy.
I get it though logically… one comic book is different from another because in one comic book universe Superman has magic amnesia kisses and in the other he doesn’t… so while they are technically different, they both center one Superman.
22
u/GustavoistSoldier 2d ago
Imho, Mormons aren't actually christian
3
u/thomas_walker65 2d ago
no true scotsman fallacy
31
12
u/Haunting-Detail2025 2d ago
It is not a fallacy to state that a two religions with massive, foundational levels of different beliefs are not the same. Mormonism is certainly Christian-adjacent, but you can’t reject every pillar of orthodox Christianity and then claim it is Christian.
Muslims and Jews also share many things in common with Christianity, that doesn’t make them the same religion
-15
u/MolemanusRex 2d ago
Why not? Do you think one has to be Trinitarian to be Christian?
27
u/Ultimanexus 2d ago
most "restorationists" like the Mormons or the INC (Iglesia ni Cristo) have theology that falls so far from historical Christianity.
IMO Apostolic Christianity (Historical Christianity) (Catholics, Orthodox) are the baseline for should be considered "Christianity" proper. The farther away they are the less "Christianity" they are.
Apostolic Christianity meaning they have Apostolic Succession, as in the bishops have an unbroken chain of ordination that connects all the way to the Apostles.
An analogy in the Islamic world is the Sunni and Shia Branches are the baseline Islam. and something like the "Nation of Islam" shouldn't be considered Islam.
17
u/GustavoistSoldier 2d ago
something like the "Nation of Islam" shouldn't be considered Islam.
I like using this analogy, as the Nation of Islam is a black supremacist UFO cult with a materialist theology.
-1
u/MolemanusRex 2d ago
Why are Catholicism and Orthodoxy more representative of “true” Christianity? Are Protestants less Christian? What about Anglicans? Are Southern Baptists more or less Christian than Northern Baptists?
14
u/Ultimanexus 2d ago
more so on historical grounds. You wouldn't be able to find baptists pre 17th century since they seperated from Anglicanism. And with Anglicanism it depends if they're "high-church" or "low-church".
There were no "protestants" prior to the 16th century. and there was no Catholic-Orthodox Divide before the Great Schism of 1054.
So if you follow the trail historically you arrive at a "Great Church" of Christianity that was one and united pre-1054 Great Schism.
If you read writings of the Church fathers which existed prior to the legalization of Christianity by Constantine, you'll see the beliefs of these early Christians are for the most part Catholic/Orthodox in nature.
An example would be the belief in the Real Presence in the Eucharist. Most protestants today deny this doctrine. But you can see from St Ignatius of Antioch:
Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God… They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the Flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, Flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes. —Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Ch 6
and the existence of bishops as succesors of the apostles as necessary to have a valid Eucharist:
Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is administered either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it.—Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Ch 8
Now get this, who is St Ignatius of Antioch? He was a disciple of the Apostle John. The same Apostle attributed to the Gospel of John, 1st and 2nd John, and the Apocalypse (Revelation)
Yeah, that close. So unless Apostle John somehow taught him wrong or he misunderstood it, this particular doctrine and teaching about the Real Presence in the Eucharist has been there since the beginning with the Apostles. Around 200 years before Christianity was even legal and Emperor Constantine was born.
4
u/Henderson-McHastur 2d ago
So unless Apostle John somehow taught him wrong or he misunderstood it
Is this not the whole contention of the Reformation (apart from the English one, that was mostly about Henry VIII's penis)? That the Catholic Church had misunderstood and diverged from the word of God? Why must we presume, simply from proximity, that the apostles correctly understood Christ, or that the students of the apostles correctly understood them? This is a taxonomical argument, not a substantive one.
We may dismiss some denominations out of hand. The Nation of Islam example is informative as a metric: it has virtually shit all to do with Islam and simply appropriated the name. We may discount it as non-Islamic. I don't think the same case can be made for Mormonism. It's certainly... unique, as far as Christian denominations go. It makes some fundamental alterations to Christian theology that are undoubtedly heretical by the standards of the Orthodox and Catholic churches. But it still centers the character and teachings of Christ, many of which are not substantively changed. And what changes are present are largely attributed to prophetic revelation - God has once again spoken to mankind through Joseph Smith, trying to set the record straight. It's actually rather sensible: why would Christ, redeemer of humanity, not come to the already-quite-populated-by-humans Americas to spread his word?
Frankly, I have no skin in this game, but it has always seemed to me as if Mormonism is the subject of this kind of argument because it's obviously a fraud. Or maybe more specifically, because we hold the attitude that it's obviously a fraud, a kind of cynicism that might not have had a place in centuries prior. We've reached a day and age post-printing press when charlatans masquerading as prophets like Joseph Smith cannot escape being called charlatans. Or maybe it's just that: we cannot accept the idea of prophets post-Christ, and Luther's success compared to Smith is attributable to a temperance in his claims, restricting himself to critiquing an existing, temporal institution rather than claiming divine revelation.
2
u/Droviin 1d ago
My understand of the Reformation was that the Church, at the time, had departed from the best teachings, not that the Church teachings were always incorrect. But, I was taught about the Reformation from a Catholic perspective and learned more from the Germans who also show the decidedly political reasons for the schism rather than the theological.
1
u/Ultimanexus 2d ago
regarding prophets post Christ it is simple in that Galatians 1:8 "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed."
I'm not saying the Apostolic Churches are perfect, but rather they are the only ones with a tangible connection to historical Christianity. Anything else that diverges isn't full Christianity (using that term) proper.
You can call it something else fair enough.
Using Nation of Islam as an example again, compared to say the Bahai or Sikhism. Which has Islamic influences and origins but are recognized that the divergence is big enough to not be called Islam proper. Unlike Nation of Islam which is Islam in name only.
7
u/WestCoastVermin 2d ago
historically, the majority of Christian churches have contended this.
1
u/MajesticBread9147 2d ago edited 2d ago
I'm no expert on theology, but isn't this logic flawed since the idea of the Trinity was created after the Bible was written? A Catholic monk named Tertullian made it up in the third century, so I don't think it should be a differentiating factor.
Honestly I have no dog in this fight though. They're different enough that they could be easily considered an offshoot of Christianity like Islam is if they claim as such, but similar enough where if they consider themselves Christian they aren't really that different from say Catholics and Christian scientists.
2
u/Ultimanexus 2d ago
it's not made up more so given a term and defined. but the belief is there. Ther just wasn't one word to describe it and over time it became articulated even more.
If you look at Islam for example. Their doctrine for God is called Tawheed. but you don't find "tawheed" written in the Quran. Yet the term itself is what describes the belief as understood by Muslims as it was written in the Quran. The concept is there but the word "tawheed" itself isn't.
Same with the Trinity. The word Trinity didn't come up until later but the concept is there.
some quotes from the Apostolic Father ST Ignatius of Antioch. This Ignatius was a disciple of the Apostle John. Born in the 1st century and died in the 2nd century. So a full 2 Centuries before Tertullian.
“Ignatius, also called Theophorus, to the Church at Ephesus in Asia . . . predestined from eternity for a glory that is lasting and unchanging, united and chosen through true suffering by the will of the Father in Jesus Christ our God” (Letter to the Ephesians 1 [A.D. 110]).
“For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary in accord with God’s plan: of the seed of David, it is true, but also of the Holy Spirit” (ibid., 18:2).
“[T]o the Church beloved and enlightened after the love of Jesus Christ, our God, by the will of him that has willed everything which is” (Letter to the Romans 1 [A.D. 110]).
You can see how at least the Divinity of Christ has always been understood and believed, refering to Jesus as God, prior to the word and term "Trinity" which is just a shortened form of Tri-Unity.
1
1
u/rainbowpapersheets 1d ago
It was not made up.
Is not as if suddenly one priest decided it and forced it on others.
The trinity was establishe because there was arians that didnt believed in it.
They hold on councils, debated and refuted arianism. (Plus, before nicea we had both church fathers believing it, 1st century clandestibe inscriptiobs and at least evidence that some jewish sects were Binitarians, we view onenes as unity rather than a singularity)
If you read a little bit of christian theology, the idea of Christ not being fully God and fully human makes christianity useless and any attempt to reconcile an arian view of christ and still call oneself christian is pure cognitive dissonance. It makes no sense in the big scheme of the faith.
Mormons not only misunderstand (the christian) God's nature, they assert that they become gods (lower case g) and they will be given their own planet to rule. That is a misunderstanding of theosis and basically is polytheism.
They believe they can baptize the dead (and did so to the jewish victims of the holocaust)
They regard black skin as a curse.
And have initiatory rituals such as secret handshakes they must learn to enter heaven, akin to occultist/secret neo platonic orders.
Just bc they share christian items does not make them christian. Theyre mormons.
Islam also is not an offshoot of christianity. Muhammad barely has any christian trace besides virgin birth, trinity misunderstanding, denying crucifixion and the supposed 2nd coming.
But other than that it does not adress any of Jesus sermons. Muhammad didnt knew them. They dont even have altars or sacrifices as the Jewish-Christian God ask.
Islam is their own thing.
0
u/PteroFractal27 1d ago
I’d argue they are, but it really comes down to how one defines a Christian.
-4
u/throwawaythrewnaway 2d ago
Most mainstream Christian denominations were Indigenous Israelists before Joseph Smith made it uncool (~1495-~1860)
3
u/FudgeAtron 2d ago
Mormonism and Nation of Islam are two sides of the same coin.
1
u/PteroFractal27 1d ago
…pardon
1
u/FudgeAtron 19h ago
Both racialized amercanized versions of abrahamic faiths.
1
u/PteroFractal27 16h ago
Americanized? How is Islam Americanized?
2
u/FudgeAtron 16h ago
Nation of Islam is an Americanized version of Islam, OG Islam is explicitly anti-racialism whereas NoI is explicitly racialist.
1
u/Famous-Echo9347 15h ago
Mormons are far less radical than the Nation of Islam. I wouldn't even really call them radical at all
1
u/FudgeAtron 15h ago
Yeah now, but at the start they were extremely radical
1
u/Famous-Echo9347 15h ago
Sort of, although I'd argue they only really became radical after their leader was murdered and people started rolling up to their communities to lynch them, and then the state of Missouri passed a law saying you where allowed to execute them on site.
When lynch mobs have been coming after them for decades, and then the government litterally passes a law saying people need to kill you on site, it's not entirely unjustified that they had a poor relationship with the government
1
u/FudgeAtron 15h ago
You could say the same about NoI it's just Black people were always targeted unlike whites.
1
u/Famous-Echo9347 15h ago
True, although the Doctrine of the NOI is more inherently radical in my opinion
1
1
139
u/Tjaeng 2d ago
I mean, if Mormonism classifies as an Abrahamic religion then it’s certainly not the fourth one. Even with a maximalist view of regarding Samaritanism and Druze as some form of Judaism or Islam respectively, there’s still Baha’i which is decidedly Abrahamic and about as syncretic and odd as Mormonism. And Rastafari, lol.