This article is written primarily from the perspective of mainstream Christianity.
1. We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.
At first glance Christians may look at the 1st article and say "it appears that Mormons believe in the same trinity that I do". However, the Godhead of Mormonism is not the same as that of the Bible, or even of the Book of Mormon, one of the scriptures of the Mormon church.
One of the earliest official statements by Christians on the godhead is given in the Nicene Creed. The creed was written and canonized during the 4th Century. The creed is as follows:
"We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried, and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father. And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end.
And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And we believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen."
Even earlier than the Nicene Creed is the writing of Clement of Rome. Clement was the fourth Bishop of Rome and wrote an epistle to the Corinthians at the very end of the first century. Chapters 46 and 58 have some of the earliest references to the trinity. In chapter 58, Clement states:
". . . As surely as God lives, as Jesus Christ lives, and the Holy Ghost also (on whom are set the faith and hope of God's elect, . . ." (Early Christian Writings, p 47)
The primary difference between Mormon and Christian belief in the trinity is the Mormon belief that the trinity is three gods and not one; a triad and not a trinity. Multiplicity of gods is a key element in Mormonism.
In the Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6 Page 4 (1844), Joseph Smith stated "you have to learn to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you, - namely, by going from one small degree to another". The Bible teaches that there is only one God and that God is a spirit. The Book of Mormon also teaches this. The 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon states in Alma 22:8-11:
22:8 And now when Aaron heard this, his heart began to rejoice, and he saith, Behold, assuredly, as thou livest, O king, there is a God.
22:9 And the king saith, Is God that Great Spirit that brought our fathers out of the land of Jerusalem?
22:10 And Aaron said unto him, Yea, he is that Great Spirit, and he created all things, both in Heaven and in earth: believest thou this?
22:11 --And he saith Yea, I believe that the Great Spirit created all things, and I desire that ye should tell me concerning all these things, and I will believe thy words.
Even though the Bible and the Mormon's own scripture, the Book of Mormon, states that God is a spirit, by 1840 Joseph Smith is beginning to teach that God the Father has a body:
"The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's; the Son also;" (Doctrine & Covenants: Section 130:22)
Joseph Smith's conception of the godhead changed over time. However, if one is to believe the veracity of the First Vision account, Smith's description of the godhead should have remained constant. Twenty years after his supposed first vision (where he was said to have seen God the Father and Jesus Christ), in the Lectures on Faith he stated the following about God the Father:
"the Father being a personage of spirit, glory, and power, possessing all perfection and fullness".
A personage of spirit, not a man; no body. This agrees with the definitions out of the Book of Mormon, which also agrees with the Bible. If Smith had seen God the Father with a body he would have taught this in the Lectures on Faith. Another problem with the first vision account is the multiplicity of different versions that exist. The latest version of the first vision account is what the Mormon Church uses today. Prior accounts indicated varying reasons why Smith went to pray and reported differing numbers and types of visiting personages. As stated earlier, if the first vision actually occurred the story would not have changed; the nature of God would have been consistent and unchanging.
During the fourth century CE the Christian church held a number of councils that discussed the nature of God and Christ. These councils were trying to address a number of heresies. One of these was Arianism which taught that Christ was less than God. Another was Nestorianism which made God two persons, that is God as human and God as divine. Nestorianism also taught that Mary was not the mother of God but only the mother of the "human" Jesus. It was at this time that the definition of the Trinity was formalized.
Another facet of Mormonism is the way in which Mary conceived Jesus, resulting in the Virgin Birth. Mormon Doctrine teaches that God, because he has a body of flesh and bones, actually had intercourse with Mary to impregnate her and cause the birth of Jesus. Mary was betrothed to Joseph. I do not recall in any scripture, Christian or Mormon, that indicates that God and Mary were married. Would not this be at the least fornication on God's part? And if we are children of God couldn"t this also be viewed as incest? Brigham Young (second Prophet of the Mormon Church) stated "Jesus our Elder Brother was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in Heaven." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, page 51, 1852). This also shows the belief by Brigham Young, second prophet of the Mormon Church, that Adam was God. Bruce R. McConkie, who was a member of the First Council of the Seventy (later a Mormon Apostle) stated,"Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers," (Mormon Doctrine, 1966, page 547.)
To fully understand the conception of Jesus, we must look not only to the New but to the Old Testament. To understand the conception I will analyze Luke 1:31-35:
Lu:1:31: And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
Lu:1:32: He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Lu:1:33: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
Lu:1:34: Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
Lu:1:35: And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
The key to understanding is with the italicized words. The first is come upon. The meaning of this from the original is "to supervene : i.e. arrive, occur, (fig.) Influence (Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, 1904). This term is not used in the Biblical sense of a man knowing a woman, but only in the sense of approaching unto. The next word is overshadow. This comes from the Greek word episkiazo which means to cast a shade upon or envelope in a haze of brilliancy. It may also mean to invest with preternatural influence. The same word occurs four other times in the New Testament (Matthew 17:5, Mark 9:7, Luke 9:34, Acts 5:15). In Acts 5:15 the word is used to describe the act of Peter's shadow overshadowing sick people on the street. Using these examples we may easily see that the Holy Spirit "cast a shade" or worked a miracle upon Mary. The Angel Gabriel told Mary that the Holy Spirit would approach her and overshadow her and that she would conceive without knowing a man. The language that the Angel would have used would have been that spoken by Mary (Miriam in Hebrew), which would have been Hebrew or Aramaic. In these languages the word for Spirit (ruah) is feminine. In Genesis 1:2 it reads "The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." In this verse both the noun, Spirit (ruah), and the verb, moved (merachaphot), are feminine in the Hebrew. Mary would have known that this feminine Presence of the divine would by the Power of the Highest cause her to miraculously be with child. There would be no thought in her mind that the Holy Spirit was masculine. In reading the account of the virgin birth there is no indication that anything external was to be placed within her. Mary herself conceived. It was a miracle.
The Bible and the Book of Mormon concur on this. This is also confirmed in the Gospel of Matthew chapter 1 verse 18 and in the Book of Mormon in 1st Nephi 11:18-19 (1830 Edition).
Matthew 1:18: Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
1st Nephi 11:18 And he said unto me, Behold, the virgin which thou seest, is the mother of God, after the manner of flesh.
1st Nephi 11:19 And it came to pass I beheld that she was carried away in the spirit; and after that she had been carried away in the spirit for the space of time, the angel spake unto me, saying, look!
1st Nephi 11:20 And I looked and beheld the virgin again, bearing a child in her arms.
1st Nephi 11:21 And the angel said unto me, behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Eternal Father!
As stated previously, the nature of God is a fundamental difference between Mormonism and Christianity. The Mormon God is an anthropomorphized monarchic deity. The act of making God man removes the infinite from his character. God should be the answer to man's finitude. He should not be the prime example of finitude. As a youth in the Mormon Church I was taught that as man is God once was. This removes God from the realm of the divine and reduces him to the level of the profane or secular. "Many confusions in the doctrine of God and many apologetic weaknesses could be avoided if God were understood first of all as being-itself or as the ground of being."
"The usual theological motif of the kingdom of God became in early Mormonism a dominant symbol which influenced the growth of belief in a multitude of kingdoms. It was not a single reality , but an ever arching frame enclosing smaller and subsidiary kingdoms. In other words, there was no total and complete identification of the kingdom of God with the awaited kingdom of Christ."
The Mormon kingdom of God motif conceptualizes the systematic theological idea of the monarchic God. A god who sits at the pinnacle of a hierarchy of divine beings. In speaking of the Welsh Mormons and the views on Mormonism in the United Kingdom Douglas Davies states " Some of these would have been strange to the ears of mainline churches. Jesus Christ, for example, is said to be "one and the same person" as Jehovah. The one being the New Testament equivalent of the other in the Old Testament, (1914:8 ). There is little justification offered for assertions like this, they are simply made rather than argued. The interesting aspect of that particular identification lies in the aligning of New Testament with Old. Whereas most orthodox believers interpret Christ as the incarnate Son who advances the divine work into the future, this Mormon reworking of doctrine regresses the Christ into such a close association with the God of the Old Testament as to merge their identity. But there is an additional subtlety within Mormon theology which alters the apparent meaning of this linkage. For God who has dealings with mankind in the Old Testament was thought by some, and notably by Brigham Young, to be none other than Adam. So to link the Christ with both Jehovah and Adam left opportunity for a higher and less involved God. But Mormons differ much over interpretation of deity, especially in the later nineteenth century. To a large extent it was a problem of bringing systematic order to a large and mixed body of vaguer sayings of Joseph Smith and other leaders."
This teaching that Jesus is one and the same as Jehovah is central to Mormonism. However, this doctrine is not substantiated by the Bible. The Hebrew word for God is Elohim. Jehovah means Lord. Isaiah 43:14 states:
"Thus saith the Lord [Jehovah], the King of Israel, Their Redeemer, the Lord of Hosts: I am the first and I am the last, and there is no god [elohim] but Me... I foretold you and you are My witnesses. Is there any god [elohim], then but Me?"
This points to the fact that Elohim and Jehovah are the same individual. An even more telling example of this is from Deuteronomy 6:4:
"Hear, O Israel! The Lord [Jehovah] is our God [Elohim], the Lord [Jehovah] alone."
The term "Lord God" [Jehovah Elohim] is used throughout the Old Testament and shows that these terms are interchangeable. They do not indicate two different beings or personages. This verse from Deuteronomy is an oft quoted verse and is known as the "shema" or the observation. This verse is a foundation for Judaism as it proclaims the monotheistic belief of the Jews. Jesus, as reported in Mark 12:28-34, when asked what the greatest commandment was, quoted this scripture in Deuteronomy, "Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one." Here we see an example of scripture interpreting scripture and Jesus using the same terms Lord and God as referring to the same individual.
Another difference in the nature of God is shown in the creation story. Mormon teachings about the creation, specifically from the Mormon temple ritual, teach that God used pre-existing matter to create the earth. The following is from the Mormon Temple ritual:
THE CREATION--FIRST DAY
ELOHIM: Jehovah, Michael, see: yonder is matter unorganized, go ye down and organize it into a world like unto the worlds that we have hereunto formed. Call your labors the First Day, and bring me word.
JEHOVAH: It shall be done Elohim. Come Michael, let us go down.
MICHAEL: We will go down, Jehovah.
JEHOVAH: Michael, see: here is matter unorganized. We will organize it into a world like unto worlds that we have heretofore formed. We will call our labors the First Day, and return and report.
MICHAEL: We will return and report our labors on the First Day, Jehovah.
JEHOVAH: Elohim, we have been down as thou hast commanded, and have organized a world like unto the worlds that we have heretofore formed, and we have called out labors the First Day.
ELOHIM: It is well.
This harkens back to Gnostic teachings and to some early Christian writers such as Theophilus of Antioch and Justin Martyr. These early writers believed that pre-existent matter (in the manner of the Greek Platonists) was used to create the earth and that the earth was not created ex nihilo (out of nothing). Early church opposition to Gnostic beliefs (that the God who created the earth was a lesser being, typically called the demi-urge and that pre-existing matter was used in the creation process) forced a consideration and discussion on the topic. Early Christian writers such as Tertullian (2nd to 3rd century) wrote that the creation was good and did not inherently arise from the nature of pre-existant matter. By the 4th century Christian theologians stated that God created the spiritual and natural worlds and by the council of Florence (1442) it was established that the Earth was created ex nihilo.
The idea of creation from something pre-existent allows for the introduction of evil into the world from an outside source. Creation ex nihilo puts full control of the world with God and places him before it. It removes the question of where did the matter come from if God did not create it. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and without Him not one thing came into being" (John 1:1-3). Reducing God to one who simply organized matter again removes God from the divine and sets him with the mundane. Christian theology acknowledges God as God. That all comes out of him and nothing was made or existed prior to his creating it. All was initially created good and it was only through the disobedience of Adam that a taint came upon the goodness of creation. The Biblical emphasis upon the goodness of creation (refer to the book of Genesis in the Old Testament) shows us that sin is and was not present in God's design and did not enter in from pre-existing matter but from the sin of Adam.
The final aspect that I would like to touch upon is Christology.
Part of the study of theology is Christology or the study of Christ. Theology is study of the word of God and a religion's theological underpinnings are what sets it apart from other religions and in a Christian venue the beliefs about Christ will also set apart one Christian sect from another.
Soteriology is the study of salvation. And this topic is of central concern to Christians as Christians believe that the death and resurrection of Jesus has in some way changed the human situation. Two questions arise out of this: "How is salvation to be understood?" and "How is salvation possible?"
Much of what Christians believe about salvation comes form the letters of Paul. Paul was an influential writer and used rich images to show what was offered by the Christ to the believers. Images such as healing or liberation are part of the Pauline definition of salvation. Not only in the present but also in the past and future (Romans 8:24, 1Cor 1:18, Romans 13:11). The idea or image of a release from some mortal illness allows for an understanding or appreciation of what the act of salvation does.
Another image employed by Paul is that of adoption. When a Christian accepts Christ they are thought to then have been adopted into the family of God (Romans 8:15). Some theologians (such as Alister McGrath) believe that this teaching of Paul may be based upon the legal practice of the Greco-Roman culture. Which it must be noted was not found in Jewish law. This revolves around inheritance law, and the Christian having been adopted, shares the same inheritance that Christ has. And so will receive the same glory which Christ achieved.
A third aspect of salvation is the notion of justification. Paul affirmed that we are justified through faith (Romans 5:1-2). Being justified provides a change to a believer's legal status in the sight of God. With this a believer may gain an acquittal in spite of sin. So to justify one might say that the sinner was made righteous in the sight of God. Mormonism is heavily influenced by the ideal of works and that it is through works that one is justified.
A fourth image is redemption. A question might be asked though: "Why does humankind require redemption?" Redemption involves securing someone's release through payment. In Paul's time this term could refer to the liberation of prisoners of war or even the liberation of individuals who had sold themselves into slavery to pay a debt. Paul's philosophy is that Christ secures freedom for believers as they are in bondage to the law and to death. This changes their state from being a slave to the law and death to being a slave to God (1 Cor 6:20; 7:23).
Salvation may also be seen as a ransom being paid. Three elements are included in this:
The New Testament teaches that all have been liberated from captivity through the death and resurrection of Christ (Romans 8:21, Hebrews 2:15). The first two elements are touched upon in the New Testament but the third, payment must be paid to someone, is not touched upon and begs the question, who was being paid by the paying of the ransom? Origen, a patristic theologian asked this very question and noted that it could not be paid to God so must have been paid to the devil. Gregory the Great expanded on this idea and wrote that the devil had acquired rights over fallen humanity. And that the only way he could lose these rights was for some sinless individual to be born and in the devil's claiming of this individual would overstep his authority and lose claim to all.
The word atonement was first coined in 1526 (as far as we can tell) by William Tynedale in his task of translating the New Testament into English. At that time there was no English word for reconciliation. The word atonement was coined and soon took on the meaning of "the benefits which Jesus Christ brings to his believers through his death upon the cross". This belief in the cross and the saving aspect of the cross is also central in Christian theology and belief. And is one aspect that is totally missed or ignored by Mormons. Mormon doctrine proclaims that the atonement was performed by Christ in the Garden of Gethsemene and not specifically on the cross.
Building upon Old Testament imagery, the New Testament writers presented Jesus" death on the cross as a type of sacrifice. Paul's letter to the Hebrews is a good example of this. Paul taught that Jesus" sacrificial offering was an effective and perfect sacrifice. The implication is that sacrifice as performed in the Old Testament times were only able to imitate a perfect sacrifice and so had to be done over and over again. The Greek term hilasterion (Romans 3:25) was used by Paul when talking of Jesus" death:
relating to an appeasing or expiating, having placating or expiating force, expiatory; a means of appeasing or expiating, a propitiation
Hilasterion:
This idea was further developed by the Christian community; for humanity to be "saved", the mediator (Jesus) had to sacrifice himself. Without this sacrifice there could be no expiatory event. Athanasius (promoter of orthodox Christology during the Arian controversy) made the analogy that the death of Jesus on the cross was like the sacrifice of the lamb during the Jewish festival of the Passover. Augustine of Hippo further expanded and clarified this in his book City of God: "A true sacrifice is offered in every action which is designed to unite us to God in a holy fellowship". Augustine further said "By his death, which is indeed the one and most true sacrifice offered for us, he purged, abolished, and extinguished whatever guilt there was by which the principalities and powers lawfully detained us to pay the penalty". The mediator could find no other to use as the sacrifice. None was worthy, so he sacrificed himself for all. This view helped to shape the thoughts of Western understanding of Jesus" death.
Since the belief that Christ was God incarnate, he was the only one who could understand the human condition and do something about it. He was the one who could provide a sacrifice and raise man from their fallen state.
Another way of looking at the cross is through a victory motif. The New Testament also uses this imagery of the cross (1 Cor 15:57). Words such as triumph and victory give a positive view of the cross. But the questions, What is this victory? Who was defeated? How were they defeated? may then be asked. Just as David defeated Goliath, Jesus defeated the devil and sin. With the fall of Adam, sin came into the world and it was this sin that captivated man. Jesus was able to defeat sin liberating man. As he was outside the human situation (the divine nature of Jesus) it was possible for him to enter our predicament (by being incarnate) and then through the victory of the cross he could liberate us. The theme of being trapped in a situation that could only be ameliorated from the outside was set in place. Jesus was the outsider taking care of the situation.
Another approach to the understanding of the cross is that of judgement and forgiveness. Within this framework two questions (as noted by Anselm of Canterbury in the eleventh century): Why would God wish to redeem us? How was Jesus involved in this process of redemption? In order to answer this Anselm developed an approach to the work of Jesus. First, God created the world in a certain way which expresses divinity. God created humanity so that at some point they may share his fellowship in the eternities. However these designs were frustrated by human sin. Because of this a redemption was required. So this redemption is a restoration of humanity to its original status within the creation. Jesus becomes the new Adam and sets us in a redeemed state through his sacrifice.
But how can this redemption work without God breaking his own rules of changing the moral order of things? Sin represents the rebellion of the creation and a disruption of the order of the universe. Or, an offense to God. Humans do not have the ability to make a restitution on their own. They cannot make satisfaction for sin. The Son of God (Jesus) became incarnate in order that he, Christ, God incarnate, would have both the obligation (the requirement to pay for sin) and also the divine ability to make payment for sin and thus satisfy payment of the debt. The worth of Jesus" death lies in his divinity. And why is this? Because he is God incarnate.
How does death on the cross by Jesus help us?
But this begs some questions. If God is omnipotent and omniscient how could he create humanity when he should have known what would happen to them? Is an actual sacrifice for sin necessary? And ultimately, is there even a God? The answers to these questions must be found in one's own soul. Both Christianity and Mormonism try and help to answer these questions.
Christianity grew out of the religions and cultural beliefs and morays during the first centuries of this era. Mormonism grew out of the Judeo-Christian ethic that was transplanted to America from Europe. For Mormonism to be considered mainstream Christian they must believe Christian theology. Unfortunately relatively few Mormons that I know of actually study theology. Because of this, the chance that their views on Christology and that of Mainstream Christianity coinciding is slim. Mormons basically denounce the cross. Polycarp (a first century patristic writer) in his Letter to the Phillipians" stated in Chapter VII "and whosoever does not confess the testimony of the cross is of the devil".
In spite of the fact that the modern Mormon church appears to be trying to become more mainstream in its beliefs (that is, in comparison to mainstream Christian churches), the core doctrinal elements revolving around the nature of God and the Trinity put it at odds with Protestant and Orthodox Christian theology. To the Orthodox Christian God the Father sits at the Pinnacle with Jesus and the Holy Spirit being two other parts of the one unique whole. God the Father is unbegotten and does not rely upon any other person for His source or origin. Jesus being the Incarnate part of God is not unbegotten or sourceless but has His source in the Father. The final part of the Trinity is the Holy Spirit who also has his source and origin with the Father and proceeds from Him. Western Catholicism altered this slightly to say that the Holy Spirit proceeds forth from the Father and Son. The Trinity is of one essence; "God is one and God is three: the Holy Trinity is a mystery of unity in diversity, and of diversity in unity. Father, Son and Spirit are ิone in essence" (homo-ousios), yet each is distinguished from the other two by personal characteristics".
The following quote by the current Mormon prophet, Gordon B. Hinckley sums this up succinctly:
"In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ, President Gordon B. Hinckley, current prophet of the Mormon Church, spoke of those outside the Church who say Latter-day Saints 'do not believe in the traditional Christ.' 'No, I don't. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times. He together with His Father, appeared to the boy Joseph Smith in the year 1820, and when Joseph left the grove that day, he knew more of the nature of God than all the learned ministers of the gospel of the ages.'" - Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley, LDS Church News, June 20, 1998, p.7