Honestly, framing the Latter Day Saints as “counterfeit” or implying that "we don’t know the real Jesus" just comes across as dismissive, and even sanctimonious. LDS members aren’t pretending to be Christian, our teachings sincerely believe in and strive to follow Jesus Christ as Savior. We may interpret His nature and teachings differently than creedal traditions, but differences in doctrine don’t erase the reality of our discipleship.
It’s worth remembering that Christ Himself taught us to recognize His followers “by their fruits.” I appreciate your acknowledgment that the Latter Day Saints sincerely try to live by Christian values, but if you can acknowledge that many do so, then perhaps it’s more constructive to respect that shared devotion rather than it is to attempt to dismiss our faith as mere imitation. We can disagree on theology without questioning each other’s sincerity or relationship with Christ.
I don't doubt your sincerity one bit. I just happen to think you worship a different Jesus than the one presented in the Bible. I just pray that God is forgiving to those that are deceived, be it you or me. As for me I hang my salvation on confessing that Christ is God in human flesh who came to earth to sacrifice himself in punishment for my sins, who died and resurrected beating death. In doing so He has full authority to forgive sin as He paid the price for all those who believe in Him and accept His sacrifice.
I appreciate you clarifying that you don’t doubt our sincerity. That’s important, because sincerity and devotion to Christ are at the heart of this discussion. Where we differ is in the framing; you describe our beliefs as worshipping “a different Jesus,” while from our side, we see ourselves worshipping the same Jesus of the New Testament. Born of Mary, crucified, resurrected, and the source of salvation, and though we understand His nature and role differently than creedal Christianity does. I'm not sure where the idea that "we worship a different Jesus Christ" comes from, but the claim is ill-founded.
You emphasize salvation through confessing Christ as God incarnate and His atonement for sin. We affirm that too, while also believing that discipleship involves making covenants, repenting, and striving to live His commandments. We see grace and works not as competing, but as intertwined. His sacrifice makes salvation possible, and our effort is how we respond to His grace.
I respect your conviction, and I ask for the same respect in return. Our differences in theology are real, but they don’t erase our devotion to Jesus Christ.
You need to do some research on smith and young. Smith married a 12 year old girl. Young performed marriages between 8 year olds and old men. The temple ceremony with the annoitings and the oaths is sick. There are many good Mormons. Great, hardworking people, but when you get into the history and doctrine, it's problematic.
May I recommend exmormon.org. all info taken from original documents.
Historical claims about early leaders can be debated, but it’s worth noting that a lot of what circulates online is presented without context or balance. The church has always encouraged members to study its history, and there are resources like the Joseph Smith Papers and the official Gospel Topics Essays that deal directly with the harder questions in transparent ways.
On terminology: you’re right that “Mormon” has been used by both outsiders and members for a long time, and has even appeared in official materials. But it was never the formal name of the church, which since 1838 has been The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That’s why President Nelson asked in 2018 that we move away from the nickname and use the full name, to keep the focus on Christ.
There are complex parts of history and doctrine, but none of that changes the reality that the LDS faith is centered on Jesus Christ, His atonement, and His gospel.
Original sources do exist, and that’s exactly why projects like the Joseph Smith Papers make them available in full. But interpretation of those documents is always open to debate. Context matters, and simply pointing to critical summaries on exmormon.org isn’t the same thing as reading the records themselves.
Reducing everything about the church to “it’s all problematic” misses the heart of what it actually teaches. The teachings are centered on faith in Jesus Christ as Savior, repentance, covenants, and striving to follow Him. That’s what defines Latter-day Saint discipleship, even while we acknowledge our history has complex and difficult chapters.
Honestly, framing the Latter Day Saints as “counterfeit” or implying that "we don’t know the real Jesus" just comes across as dismissive, and even sanctimonious. LDS members aren’t pretending to be Christian, our teachings sincerely believe in and strive to follow Jesus Christ as Savior. We may interpret His nature and teachings differently than creedal traditions, but differences in doctrine don’t erase the reality of our discipleship.
It’s worth remembering that Christ Himself taught us to recognize His followers “by their fruits.” I appreciate your acknowledgment that the Latter Day Saints sincerely try to live by Christian values, but if you can acknowledge that many do so, then perhaps it’s more constructive to respect that shared devotion rather than it is to attempt to dismiss our faith as mere imitation. We can disagree on theology without questioning each other’s sincerity or relationship with Christ.
I don't doubt your sincerity one bit. I just happen to think you worship a different Jesus than the one presented in the Bible. I just pray that God is forgiving to those that are deceived, be it you or me. As for me I hang my salvation on confessing that Christ is God in human flesh who came to earth to sacrifice himself in punishment for my sins, who died and resurrected beating death. In doing so He has full authority to forgive sin as He paid the price for all those who believe in Him and accept His sacrifice.
I appreciate you clarifying that you don’t doubt our sincerity. That’s important, because sincerity and devotion to Christ are at the heart of this discussion. Where we differ is in the framing; you describe our beliefs as worshipping “a different Jesus,” while from our side, we see ourselves worshipping the same Jesus of the New Testament. Born of Mary, crucified, resurrected, and the source of salvation, and though we understand His nature and role differently than creedal Christianity does. I'm not sure where the idea that "we worship a different Jesus Christ" comes from, but the claim is ill-founded.
You emphasize salvation through confessing Christ as God incarnate and His atonement for sin. We affirm that too, while also believing that discipleship involves making covenants, repenting, and striving to live His commandments. We see grace and works not as competing, but as intertwined. His sacrifice makes salvation possible, and our effort is how we respond to His grace.
I respect your conviction, and I ask for the same respect in return. Our differences in theology are real, but they don’t erase our devotion to Jesus Christ.
You got it! MAGA on. I do have mormon friends still, we just don't discuss theology. I want to keep them as friends.
You need to do some research on smith and young. Smith married a 12 year old girl. Young performed marriages between 8 year olds and old men. The temple ceremony with the annoitings and the oaths is sick. There are many good Mormons. Great, hardworking people, but when you get into the history and doctrine, it's problematic.
May I recommend exmormon.org. all info taken from original documents.
Historical claims about early leaders can be debated, but it’s worth noting that a lot of what circulates online is presented without context or balance. The church has always encouraged members to study its history, and there are resources like the Joseph Smith Papers and the official Gospel Topics Essays that deal directly with the harder questions in transparent ways.
On terminology: you’re right that “Mormon” has been used by both outsiders and members for a long time, and has even appeared in official materials. But it was never the formal name of the church, which since 1838 has been The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That’s why President Nelson asked in 2018 that we move away from the nickname and use the full name, to keep the focus on Christ.
There are complex parts of history and doctrine, but none of that changes the reality that the LDS faith is centered on Jesus Christ, His atonement, and His gospel.
Well, actually they can't be debated. It's all there in their own words and in the overwhelming words of the people who lived it.
Original sources do exist, and that’s exactly why projects like the Joseph Smith Papers make them available in full. But interpretation of those documents is always open to debate. Context matters, and simply pointing to critical summaries on exmormon.org isn’t the same thing as reading the records themselves.
Reducing everything about the church to “it’s all problematic” misses the heart of what it actually teaches. The teachings are centered on faith in Jesus Christ as Savior, repentance, covenants, and striving to follow Him. That’s what defines Latter-day Saint discipleship, even while we acknowledge our history has complex and difficult chapters.