Mormonism: the Fourth Abrahamic Religion

The other possible contenders for "Fourth Abrahamic religion"- the Baha'i, Druze, and Rastafarians are all fewer in number than LDS members. The Rastafarians are localized to one region of the world, and the Druze even more so. The Baha'i have a more expanded worldview but are anti-proselytizing. Mormons, on the other hand, are very aggressively evangelistic.

But another issue is that the Jehovah's Witnesses, another aggressively evangelistic and highly unorthodox Christian offshoot, have more people than Mormons. So I'm not sure if they should be considered as well as a Fourth Abrahamic religion. Another important factor that's hard to quantify is how much political, cultural, and social influence these sects have in the world.
 
Another difference between "Christianity" (read RC, EO, and mainstream Protestants) and Mormonism is that LDS theology is very young and nowhere near as complex than, say, the systematic theology of Catholicism. That's not a deficiency or knock against the LDS -- they just haven't been around for a long time. I think the question of whether LDS is an entirely new faith tradition or an offshoot of Christianity comes down to the way in which the LDS choose to interpret their scriptures. If the LDS try to explain the Book of Mormon through the examples of the early Church Fathers and the creeds of Christianity, then that would be a movement towards Christianity. If the LDS hold up the Book of Mormon and their other scriptures as exact messages from God exempt from scriptural criticism, then a greater case could be made that the LDS are outside the Christian tradition. Perhaps the LDS might develop a critical theory that encompasses some other tradition; if that's the case then a very strong case could be made that the LDS is not Christian.
 

Hnau

Banned
Another difference between "Christianity" (read RC, EO, and mainstream Protestants) and Mormonism is that LDS theology is very young and nowhere near as complex than, say, the systematic theology of Catholicism.

I don't know, I don't think you can say that with much accuracy unless you've been an adherent of both the Catholic Church and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As a member of the latter, I have yet to come across a religion as complex and deep as my own... there's much more to absorb than what can be found on the homepage or the wikipedia article, especially in the temple, that is concealed as much as possible from the public. But, I have not been Catholic, so I could be wrong... its just that all my discussions with Catholics have always been very surface-level, so I get that impression from it.
 
Catholics have their share of after-market practices (confession, rosaries, immaculate conception). Thus, I believe most Catholics consider Mormons (and Jehovah's Witnesses) to be Christian because they believe in Christ, and are not a fourth Abrahamic faith.
 
I think a major separate holy text - not different interpretations or a few pieces of specific revelation - is a pretty compelling difference between Abrahamic faiths.
The Book of Mormon is a major, transformative addition to the Bible - you can't add that much scripture and stay in bounds. See the New Testament and the Koran.
I would have to agree with Mikey on this one. The Abrahamic religion are the evolution of the other. Each one thinks they have the revelation/ the last revelation of god, with each religion building on the other. Adding to the bible would put them, at lest on the path, of be a separate religion.
I personally know little of Mormonism but if what The Tsar said is true I would not but them in Christendom.
Back to the OP. I don't think we can wholly define a new religion just by having additional gospels. Catholicism Orthodoxy and Protestantism are all considered Christian yet they all have variations on what books make up their Bible.
They are variations but the Mormons have another book as well as having a variation of the bible
Another difference between "Christianity" (read RC, EO, and mainstream Protestants) and Mormonism is that LDS theology is very young and nowhere near as complex than, say, the systematic theology of Catholicism. That's not a deficiency or knock against the LDS -- they just haven't been around for a long time. I think the question of whether LDS is an entirely new faith tradition or an offshoot of Christianity comes down to the way in which the LDS choose to interpret their scriptures. If the LDS try to explain the Book of Mormon through the examples of the early Church Fathers and the creeds of Christianity, then that would be a movement towards Christianity. If the LDS hold up the Book of Mormon and their other scriptures as exact messages from God exempt from scriptural criticism, then a greater case could be made that the LDS are outside the Christian tradition. Perhaps the LDS might develop a critical theory that encompasses some other tradition; if that's the case then a very strong case could be made that the LDS is not Christian.

Agreed

As a Mormon, I would consider our religion the Fourth Abrahamic Religion: its different enough, has additional revelations, scripture, etc. But we also worship Jesus Christ... so wouldn't we be Christians as well? I'm not quite sure how it works, this classification.
I have also gotten a similar thought form some of the Mormon that I know.

To answer the OP I think that It is on the path of becoming a new Abrahamic if it is not one already. The part that makes me think that they are on the path is that they believe in Christ. To me (and the many different church Sunday schools I have been) Christianity is defined by the belief in Christ as the son of God. However that is just me. What makes me think that they are one already is that the book of Mormon is (form what I understand) very important. As proximefactum said, if the BoM is but into a place were it is an exact messages from God, then the it would put it out side of Christianity.
 
I think they'd have to adopt the name "Mormonism" officially, with "Mormon" as the demonym. It's a mouthfull to say "The Church of Jesus Christ and Latter-Day Saints," - just say Mormon Church or something.

Also, the Book of Mormon would have to use the phrase "and it came to pass" much less. The Mormon Church would have a much better potential as a fourth major Abrahamic religion if...

1) It wasn't so simillar and close to Christianity.

2) There was less stuff people could use to identify it as a "fake religion."
 

Zioneer

Banned
2) There was less stuff people could use to identify it as a "fake religion."


Okay, now you're just flaming. I'm LDS/Mormon/Whatever you want to call it, and by the statements by users other then Mormons in this thread, it is not identified as a "fake religion".

As for the OP, perhaps. But we just see ourselves as an off-shot (admittedly claiming that we are far older then we appear) of Christianity. So, probably not the 4th Abrahamic religion.
 

Hnau

Banned
FallenMorgan said:
2) There was less stuff people could use to identify it as a "fake religion."

What, exactly, do you consider falls into this category?

I think they'd have to adopt the name "Mormonism" officially, with "Mormon" as the demonym. It's a mouthfull to say "The Church of Jesus Christ and Latter-Day Saints," - just say Mormon Church or something.

Officially, we're pretty against calling ourselves "Mormons". That's a name non-LDS invented for us. Why is "Latter-day Saint" too much of a mouthful, or "LDS Church"? Its only an extra syllable or two.

Also, the Book of Mormon would have to use the phrase "and it came to pass" much less.

Haha, is that a serious problem for potential converts? ;)
 
Officially, we're pretty against calling ourselves "Mormons". That's a name non-LDS invented for us. Why is "Latter-day Saint" too much of a mouthful, or "LDS Church"? Its only an extra syllable or two.

Of course, "Methodists", "Christians" and "Quakers" are all (originally pejorative) labels applied by outsiders, just in religion. In the case of the first two, it was taken over with pride. In politics, "Tory" (?and Whig?) are the same.
 
Top