Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLutheran
I come in peace. I felt compelled to preface my question with that statement so it will be clear that I'm not looking for a fight, I apologize in advance if this topic has been hashed and rehashed, and I'm just plain curious. Are we all good so far? 
I am interested in learning how the LDS Articles of Faith differ from the creeds that Joseph Smith was told were an abomination.
Thank you, in advance, for your insights. |
I appreciate the way this question is put, and hope you find value in my answer. I am dissatisfied with the previous answers in this thread, and thus am posting my own response. Odds are, others will in turn be dissatisfied with my post... Ah well.
To me, the difference between a 'creed' and statements of faith is not so much in the substance in the text, as in how these statements are used by the institution. For example, Joseph Smith said that "No man was ever damned for believing too much, but rather was damned for believing to little". He extremely disliked having a 'litmus' test of belief, in terms of who was acceptable in the Church, and who was not.
His specific beef with creeds was that those who did not profess complete agreement to the creeds, were either ostracized or flatly excommunicated for heresy. He NEVER wanted that to happen in the Mormon church.
Some Catholic creeds are arguably compatible with Mormon belief, shocking as that may be to some Mormons. The difference is, no Mormon EVER needs to agree with all the Articles of Faith (or even a 'qualifying subset') to retain their LDS membership. It is not even an issue.
Does that help?
HiJolly