WI: No Jehovah's witnesses.

elkarlo

Banned
What about that isn't Christian?

I think the Mormon phil goes into something that does not jive with the rest of Christianity. That is the idea of spirit children, and resurrection into godhood. That basically flies in the face of orthodoxy. You can't be in the same monotheistic umbrella and you yourself can become a god.
 
I think the Mormon phil goes into something that does not jive with the rest of Christianity. That is the idea of spirit children, and resurrection into godhood. That basically flies in the face of orthodoxy. You can't be in the same monotheistic umbrella and you yourself can become a god.
Isn't oneness with God part of the point of Heaven?
Wasn't Protestantism considered going against orthodoxy at the time?
See what I mean about it being a church definition not a basic belief one?
 
Isn't oneness with God part of the point of Heaven?
Wasn't Protestantism considered going against orthodoxy at the time?
See what I mean about it being a church definition not a basic belief one?

No the issue is this. Mormons are polytheists. I mean even if we include trinitarian I think we should draw the line at people who straight up believe in multiple gods.
 
No the issue is this. Mormons are polytheists. I mean even if we include trinitarian I think we should draw the line at people who straight up believe in multiple gods.
You are forgetting the whole 1 god or 3 was a huge discussion among early Christians. That didn't make them non Christian. Your link straight up shows that Mormons extend the link of the trinity to include everyone's soul. If Mormons are polytheist by your definition then so are Trinitarians. You basically make only Unitarians Christian.
 
There's a reason we don't call or see Christians as Jews, even through Christianity could make a just as good claim as modern Judaism as being the descendent of 1st century Judaism, and that because the other Jewish sects agreed to throw Christianity out of Judaisms. In the sam e manner all other Christians pretty much agree on some minimum standards for being Christians, and Jehovah's Witnesses fall outside it (through just barely, which are why the non-Christianity of Jehovah's Witnesse and Unitarians are in general kept on purely theological level), while Mormons fall so far out that it's pretty much a joke to see them as Christians, as a rule if the founder of your faith claim to be a post-Christ prophet, you're not Christian.
 
You are forgetting the whole 1 god or 3 was a huge discussion among early Christians. That didn't make them non Christian. Your link straight up shows that Mormons extend the link of the trinity to include everyone's soul. If Mormons are polytheist by your definition then so are Trinitarians. You basically make only Unitarians Christian.

Except the idea of infinite regress directly contradicts the old testament. Comparatively Christians believe that the trinity is all made of one god stuff and all have the same powers. Whereas the gods of mormonism have delineated areas of control etc.
 
Except the idea of infinite regress directly contradicts the old testament.
The Old Testament is not fundamental to Christianity even if historically foundational.

Comparatively Christians believe that the trinity is all made of one god stuff and all have the same powers.
Several Christians before Nicene and after would disagree with having the same powers.

Whereas the gods of mormonism have delineated areas of control etc.
Sounds like angels.

I strongly suspect the only reason you don't think JWs and members of LDS aren't Christian is because you don't want them to. It challenges your certainty of your specific faith.
 
The Old Testament is not fundamental to Christianity even if historically foundational.

According to who is it not fundamental. Positive Christianity is rejected for a reason you know.

Several Christians before Nicene and after would disagree with having the same powers.

Yeah and those people deny Nicaea, and so fall outside what can be called Christian.

Sounds like angels.

Angels aren't tested into that position and they don't get the powers of God.

I strongly suspect the only reason you don't think JWs and members of LDS aren't Christian is because you don't want them to. It challenges your certainty of your specific faith.

No not really. I am Orthodox, my religions claim to truth is based on the fact that it is the unbroken Church. In comparison protestants have judaized by removing large parts of the old testament. And Catholics have changed the dogma, without proper consultation. This is to say nothing of so called restorationists, like SDA'S, JW's, and Mormons.
 

SsgtC

Banned
No not really. I am Orthodox, my religions claim to truth is based on the fact that it is the unbroken Church. In comparison protestants have judaized by removing large parts of the old testament. And Catholics have changed the dogma, without proper consultation. This is to say nothing of so called restorationists, like SDA'S, JW's, and Mormons.
Thank you for this. You just admitted what we've been saying all along: that you're arguing denomination, not Christianity. You've essentially just said that you consider Orthodox Christians to be the only "true" Christians, with every other faith being some form of apostasy. That clarifies so much for the rest of us
 
Last edited:
According to who is it not fundamental. Positive Christianity is rejected for a reason you know.
Well considering following Jesus breaks all previous covenants...

Yeah and those people deny Nicaea, and so fall outside what can be called Christian.
So your criteria is follower of the Nicene = Christian. Good to know that you don't consider Saint Paul as Christian.

No not really. I am Orthodox, my religions claim to truth is based on the fact that it is the unbroken Church. In comparison protestants have judaized by removing large parts of the old testament. And Catholics have changed the dogma, without proper consultation. This is to say nothing of so called restorationists, like SDA'S, JW's, and Mormons.
So basically the only Christians are Eastern Orthodox? You've kind of proved my point.

I repeat the simplest definition of a Christian, one that doesn't bring in dogma and doctrine or other church politics, is someone who believes Jesus is the Son of God and the Messiah and follows his teaching.
 
This is an interesting question, though I think it misses the point a bit (and this thread has focused a bit too much on theology, IMHO). Charles Taze Russel wasn't really the founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses in the modern sense, Joseph Rutherford was. When Rutherford became president of the Watch Tower Society, he changed a lot both in the organisation and its beliefs, which also resulted in a large turnover in adherents. In the larger Bible Student movement as initiated by Taze Russel Jehovah's Witness are a bit of an outlier, even if they're by far the largest group. Even without Taze Russel laying the groundwork, Rutherford might have ended up creating a different-yet-similar movement eventually.

But 'no Jehovah's Witnesses', or even 'no Bible Students', has more consequences than might be apparent at first. There's a lot of case law worldwide on issues of freedom of speech, conscientious objection and freedom of religion, precisely because of both the rather stringent JW ethical norms, and their really strong adherence to them. As with any POD there's a chance another movement or group could've exhibited similar behaviour and so a similar reaction, but the legal footprint of the Jehovah's Witnesses is significant.
 
Last edited:
you're arguing denomination

Nope, I was explaining why my religions truth claims are valid within the context of Christianity. Catholics and Protestants are still Christian, they are wrong but they are still Christians. In my view, JW's are borderline, as with all unitarians, but Mormons are straight no Christian.

Well considering following Jesus breaks all previous covenants...

Answer the question.

So your criteria is follower of the Nicene = Christian. Good to know that you don't consider Saint Paul as Christian.

Show me where Saint Paul denies Nicaea.

So basically the only Christians are Eastern Orthodox?

Nope, we are right, but other groups are still Christian.

In the larger Bible Student movement as initiated by Taze Russel Jehovah's Witness are a bit of an outlier, even if they're not by far the largest group.

What would these other groups be?

There's a lot of case law worldwide on issues of freedom of speech, conscientious objection and freedom of religion, precisely because of both the rather stringent JW ethical norms, and their really strong adherence to them. As with any POD there's a chance another movement or group could've exhibited similar behaviour and so a similar reaction, but the legal footprint of the Jehovah's Witnesses is significant.

I think people over state how big an imprint they leave on the law. This is only because alot of these cases would likely be decided with other divergent groups or by Atheists later on.
 
Answer the question.
What question? You claimed the OT was fundamental, I said it was foundational but no longer fundamental and added that Jesus broke all previous covenants. Otherwise not following Leviticus makes one nonChristian.

Show me where Saint Paul denies Nicaea.
Considering Paul died centuries before the Nicene Creed was established how can I? I was responding to your statement that implied only followers of the Nicene were Christian. By that logic all who proceeded it were not Christian including Paul. That rather blows a hole in Nicene=Christian.

I suggest you list the criteria for what you think a Christian is and see who prior to Nicene fits that.
 
Can we end a discussion of what is required to be a Christian? We have been asked what would happen if there were no Jehovah's Witnesses.

If we count them since 1870, then world we live today would be unrecognizable. Seven millions people would live vastly different lives - some of them would die in a wars they never OTL fought, some of them would not face OTL persecution and live. In fact, every man who OTL met a JW would have vastly different life. What if some annoying publisher delayed his departure to work? In that world he could lose his job/have traffic accident/something else. Every event can influence other things - for example, living man who OTL could die due to his religion will have a child. This child can be a military genius that leads to quicker victories in the World War II or a complete moron who lose Normandy landings. He can be the politician, revolutionary, presidential assasin, political activist who changes direction of OTL elections.

Besides, Dwight D. Eisenhower life would be vastly different. Maybe Robert Taft wins 1952 election. Thus, we can see limited interventionism in the US, withdrawal from Indochina, Europe becoming socialist/even communist.
 
Top