Not all pleasant, but good.
I am sharing one viewer's response not because I necessarily agree with every point (he apparently does not agree with me) nor because it is the "best", but because it is reasoned and points out things that seem to have been missed by others.
BotBot - 3/3/2012 2:46 AM
"If commentators such as Hunsaker would simply say Mormons’ theology is based on New Testament Christianity, not Fourth Century Creeds, they could clarify a lot of confusion is folks' minds. For example, the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) views on Baptism, Lay Ministry, the Trinity, Theosis, Grace vs. Works, the Divinity of Jesus Christ comport more closely with Early Christianity than any other denomination."
Thank you, BotBot for your input.
Others have asked me to stop with the sarcasm for just a moment and express a sincere opinion on what was said by Dr. Land of the Southern Baptist Convention in a recent article in newsmax.com. Just to recap, he contends that, "charitably" speaking, Mormonism could be considered a "4th Abrahamic religion" alongside Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
At first blush, the comparison seems to be fascinating and even complimentary, especially given Mormonism's dispensationalist claim that it is merely the latest (and last) restoration of the same gospel taught by prophets and then Christ himself.
But Dr. Land does not mean this as a compliment.
He brought it up to put Mormons well outside of Christianity. He even served up a comparison of Mormonism and Islam. It was as if to say, "Well, Mormonism sure ain't Christianity..." You would suppose such a statement would be followed by sound theological arguments, but instead we get only the superficial and silly. (Please note, I am passing judgment only on his arguments, I am NOT passing judgment on either religion.)
He seemed to be saying (between the lines) that since Joseph Smith Junior produced new "scripture," that should solidly put him in the same camp as Muhammad who gave the world The Koran. He also seemed to be saying that such new scripture (The Book of Mormon) must automatically contradict older scripture (The Bible). But in that he fails to acknowledge The Bible is a collection of writings by and about prophets and leaders spread over hundreds of years with each one reiterating and expanding on those who came before.
Does Moses contradict Matthew? Even when Christ swept away the Mosaic Law, he did not say it was wrong, only that there was something more beyond the old that was required to be His disciple.
I was disappointed in the article on Dr. Land because it seemed to break little new ground. Sure the whole "4th Abrahamic religion" thing was, on the surface, kind of cool. But there was nothing to support it other than his saying it might be so.