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 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 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.
They are variations but the Mormons have another book as well as having a variation of the bibleBack 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.
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.
I have also gotten a similar thought form some of the Mormon that I know.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.
2) There was less stuff people could use to identify it as a "fake religion."
FallenMorgan said:2) There was less stuff people could use to identify it as a "fake religion."
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.
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.