Skip to main content

MORMONISM: A NEW RELIGIOUS TRADITION OR APART OF CHRISTIANITY?


Many scholars and historians who have studied Mormonism, including Jan Shipps, have concluded that it is an entirely new and distinct religious tradition (a conclusion I do not entirely disagree with). Yet, some of them (Shipps included) still maintain that Mormonism is a form of Christianity. This seems rather confusing – how could it be a new religious tradition all its own, and yet still be a form of Christianity? Perhaps this part of the reason why Shipps views this as a complicated question, without a straightforward answer (See Jan Shipps, “Is Mormonism Christian? Reflections on a Complicated Question,” BYU Studies 33:3 [1993], pg. 438-465).

Anyway, yesterday I was reflecting on this seeming contradiction (as I personally hold a similar view) when the thought occurred. Perhaps it analogous to how Christianity sprung up out of Judaism and became a distinctly different, new religious tradition, yet both Christianity and Judaism both are Abrahamic religious traditions. Or, in other words, while they are separate religions, they are both forms of religion rooted in the Abrahamic covenant and tradition (as is Islam, another distinctly unique religious tradition). Likewise, although Orthodox Christianity and Mormonism are two separate religions, both are forms of religion centered and focused on Jesus Christ as our Savior, therefore both represent different forms the Christian religious tradition.

Anyway, just an idea which I felt I should share. More study would need to go into it before a serious conclusion could be reached.

Any thoughts? Agree, disagree? Let me know what you think.

Comments

  1. I'm enjoying these little thought provoking posts. Agree or disagree, it's good to have these ideas discussed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mormonism definitely, without doubt, is a Christian faith.

    But what zealous Evangelicals usually mean by the word "Christian" is something far different than what Mormons usually mean. To the Evangelical the word "Christian" is analogous with "saved." So when they claim that Mormons are not "Christian" what they are really saying is that Mormons are not "saved."

    But as far as a fundamental belief in Christ is concerned, Mormonism is as Christians as the next faith. If we apply the way the word "Christian" was first employed by the enemies of Christianity, Mormonism would certainly be considered "Christian."

    But when someone unrelentingly insists that Mormons aren't "Christian", I sometimes just sigh and tell them "Fine, you can be the Christian and I will be the Christ-believer."

    ReplyDelete
  3. To me it seems a bit odd that Evangelicals treat the word Christian with such reverence and exclusivity when the term Christian did not originate as a term of self identification either with Jesus or his earliest followers. A cursory study of the New Testament will show that there were several other terms the early "Christian" Church used to self identify, and one of the more popular ones happens to have been Saint.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The 15 “Best Books” to Read BEFORE Having a Faith Crisis

Elder M. Russell Ballard recently stressed that it is important for Gospel educators to be well-informed on controversial topics, not only by studying the scriptures and Church materials, but also by reading “the best LDS scholarship available.” I personally think it is imperative in today’s world for every Latter-day Saint—not just Gospel educators—to make an effort to be informed on both controversial issues as well as knowing reliable faith-building information as well.
(Given that Elder Ballard’s CES address was published to general Church membership in the Ensign, I think it’s safe to say that Church leadership also feels this way.)
An important step in the process of getting informed is reading the 11 Gospel Topic essays and getting familiar with their contents. But what’s next? How can a person learn more about these and other topics? What are the “best books” (D&C 88:118) or “the best LDS scholarship available”?
Here are 15 suggestions.
1. Michael R. Ash, Shaken Faith S…

“The Dominant Narrative is Not True”: Some Thoughts on Recent Remarks by Richard Bushman

The following is making its rounds on Facebook (from this video): Questioner: In your view do you see room in Mormonism for several narratives of a religious experience or do you think that in order for the Church to remain strong they would have to hold to that dominant narrative?
Richard Bushman: I think that for the Church to remain strong it has to reconstruct its narrative. The dominant narrative is not true; it can’t be sustained. The Church has to absorb all this new information or it will be on very shaky grounds and that's what it is trying to do and it will be a strain for a lot of people, older people especially. But I think it has to change. As I have seen this quote flash across my Facebook news feed and thought about how to make sense of it, I have been reminded of the short essay response questions I would often have on tests or assignments in college or even high school. It would not be uncommon for these questions to be built around a quote from an important schola…

Responding to the New Video on Nahom as Archaeological Evidence for the Book of Mormon

Many of my (few) readers have probably already seen the new video by Book of Mormon Central on Nahom as archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon, starring my good friend (and co-author on a related paper) Stephen Smoot. If you haven’t, check it out:


As usual, comments sections wherever this video is shared have been flooded by Internet ex-Mormons insisting this not evidence for the Book of Mormon. I’ve actually had a few productive conversations with some reasonable people who don’t think Nahom is, by itself, compelling evidence—and I can understand that. But the insistence that Nahom is not evidence at all is just, frankly, absurd. So I’ll just go ahead and preempt about 90% of future responses to this post by responding to the most common arguments against Nahom/NHM now:
1. The Book of Mormon is false, therefore there can be no evidence, therefore this is not evidence. First, this is circular reasoning. It assumes the conclusion (Book of Mormon is false) which the evidence pre…