My short answer is yes, in most "objective" situations. For things like creating a family tree of religions/denominations or counting populations demographically, I think there should be two qualifications for being a Christian:
1. Self-identifying as a Christian.
2. Believing in the literal, historical Resurrection.
Those are deal breakers. If you are a "follower of Jesus' teachings" but don't believe in the Resurrection, you are not a Christian in any meaningful sense. Early Christians were adamant that their faith stands and falls on the truth of the Resurrection story. Even early Unitarians who denied the actual divinity of Christ believed that God raised Him from the dead.
Also, even if you might believe in SOME aspect of divinity surrounding (e.g., Muslims believing Jesus ascended into Heaven) but do not identify as a Christian, you are obviously not one.
Using these, Mormons (and Jehovah's Witnesses) check both boxes. With that said, two more points just for conversation...
1. This is a point in Mormons' favor. I think to be "heretical" as it relates to a certain religion, a group HAS to fall under the umbrella of that religion, at least in some sense. I know others have provided pushback against this in pretty articulate ways, but I think there is a very clear intuitive difference between Arians and Buddhists. The latter doesn't claim to be Christian, doesn't hold ANY of the key beliefs of the faith and therefore could never be called heretics, as the term just simply does not apply to them in any way. However, Arians simply had severely problematic beliefs to be "orthodox," but they identified as Christians and held the VAST majority of traditional Christian beliefs (e.g., the virgin birth and historicity of the Resurrection). Their belief that Jesus was a created being prevented them from being "orthodox" Christians, but for "orthodox Christian" to have any meaning, there MUST be "UN-orthodox Christians." Otherwise, I believe it to be logically impossible to define Christian orthodoxy. Thus, Mormons fit nicely into the "heretical Christians" group of Arians, Jehovah's Witnesses, Nestorians, etc.
2. With that said, this is a point against Mormons. Their theology SO radically redefines what God is in a classical theist sense that there is a VERY coherent argument that they are a separate religion. The concept of "God" in classical theism is merely an infinite, immaterial consciousness that predates the Universe and acts as its first cause. God cannot have a body or be created Himself or have a frickin' wife ... that redefines what God is. And that's exactly what Mormonism does, as it teaches that God was once merely a man who became divine and shaped pre-existing and eternal elements to create the Universe. Believing in eternal "elements" is closer to atheism than theism. So, I actually think Mormons are MUCH more suspect as "Christians" than a group like Jehovah's Witnesses.
wouldnt your definition also include a number of cults?
Poll
