A date for the "Great Apostasy"

  • Thread starter Thread starter batman1973
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
jrtrent said:
You are taking your own understanding of the verses in question, which Mormons don’t share, to state that they are calling Christ a liar. That’s why I included the Mormon links and their understanding of aeon–this shows that they are not calling Christ a liar when they say an apostasy occurred, rather, they teach that His predictions of apostasy actually came to pass. For someone to make the rather shocking accusation that Mormons call Christ a liar is, itself, a lie, if they know that’s not what Mormons really believe or teach. At the very least, it’s a fallacious debating tactic designed to manipulate emotions rather than use valid reasoning.

As a former Mormon, I know there are valid reasons for leaving or not joining that faith, but the idea that they call Christ a liar is not one of them.
Click to expand...
I don’t think any Catholic believes that the Mormon Church teaches that Christ lied. Catholics claim that by reason:

Christ started his Church which he said he would be with always
Mormons claim he left his Church
Therefore Christ lied about being with his Church always.

It also makes no sense that God would start a Church while he was on earth that he knew would fail only to have to do it again.

The Mormon Church needs to redefine word like aeon and gods to try to make the claims work.

I find it interesting that the early Mormons believed the apostasy took place in 570 AD. I assume this date had to be moved back as historical facts made it difficult to make their claims work.
 
jrtrent said:
Yep. This point was brought up in the early pages of this thread, but it bears repeating that belief in an apostasy was common among the reformers, anabaptists, LDS, JW, Adventists, and hyper-dispensationalists. Historian Will Durant, in his book Caesar and Christ, had written “While Christianity converted the world, the world converted Christianity, and displayed the natural paganism of mankind,” and this in reference to a time period beginning before Constantine.
Click to expand...
Indeed. They sure get a lot of mileage out of the apostasy idea. And it seems to me that if an apostasy can occur once, it can occur again and again. Obviously the Mormon Church today is in apostasy. I guess Jesus has to keep restoring His Church over and over. He and the Holy Spirit simply aren’t strong enough to keep a Church going so they have to keep starting over again.

Jesus said we would know the truth, but I guess He was wrong. We can’t depend on Jesus after all.
 
The moved it back to when the apostles died. Look at this:
Journal of Discourses D 1:345 − p.346, Jedediah M. Grant, August 7, 1853
Pass on still further in their history, and look at their course and conduct, if you will believe the writers that lived in that age. What does old Celsus say, who was a physician in the first century, whose medical works are esteemed very highly at the present time. His works on theology were burned with fire by the Catholics, they were so shocked at what they called their impiety. Celsus was a heathen philosopher; and what does he say upon the subject of Christ and his Apostles, and their belief? He says, “The grand reason why the Gentiles and philosophers of his school persecuted Jesus Christ, was, because he had so many wives; there were Elizabeth, and Mary, and a host of others that followed him.” After Jesus went from the stage of action, the Apostles followed the example of their master. For instance, John the beloved disciple, writes in his second Epistle, “Unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth.” Again, he says, “Having many thing to write unto you (or communicate), I would not write with paper and ink: but I trust to come unto you, and speak face to face, that our joy may be full.” Again − “The children of thy elect sister greet thee.” This ancient philosopher says they were both John’s wives. Paul says, “Mine answer to them that do examine me is this: − Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas.” He, according to Celsus, had a numerous train of wives. The grand reason of the burst of public sentiment in anathemas upon Christ and his disciples, causing his crucifixion, was evidently based upon polygamy, according to the testimony of the philosophers who rose in that age. A belief in the doctrine of a plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus and his followers. We might almost think they were “Mormons.”
……
If you will pass along in the days of the Apostles, after a while you see them thrust into cauldrons of oil, crucified with their heads downwards, and persecuted in various ways until they became extinct. After a while, you have the beauty, the sublimity of Catholicism. Look at the old mother, seated upon a scarlet coloured beast, boxing the ears of her aughters; and the Church of England in turn boxing the ears of the old mother, assisted by her other numerous offspring, and then mark the bitter contentions and bloody feuds among the children! O, have they not had a sublime time − a beautiful dish of
succotash. What a uniform course they have taken!
Click to expand...
 
and
Journal of Discourses 4:259, Orson Hyde (undated: Linn has March1857)
It will be borne in mind that once on a time, there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and on a careful reading of that transaction, it will be discovered that no less a person than Jesus Christ was married on that occasion. If he was never married, his intimacy with Mary and Martha, and the other Mary also whom Jesus loved, must have been highly unbecoming and improper to say the best of it. I will venture to say that if Jesus Christ were now to pass through the most pious countries in Christendom with a train of women,. such as used to follow him, fondling about him, combing his hair, anointing him with precious ointment, washing his feet with tears, and wiping them with the hair of their heads and unmarried, or even married, he would be mobbed, tarred, and feathered, and rode, not
on an ***, but on a rail. What did the old Prophet mean when he said (speaking of Christ), “He shall see his seed, prolong his days, &c.” Did Jesus consider it necessary to fulfil every righteous command or requirement of his Father? He most certainly did. This he witnessed by submitting to baptism under the hands of John. “Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness,” said he. Was it God’s commandment to man, in the beginning, to multiply and replenish the earth? None can deny this, neither that it was a righteous command; for upon an obedience to this, depended the perpetuity of our race. Did Christ
come to destroy the law or the Prophets, or to fulfil them? He came to fulfil. Did he multiply, and did he see his seed? Did he honour his Father’s law by complying with it, or did he not? Others may do as they like, but I will not charge our Saviour with neglect or transgression in this or any other duty. At this doctrine the long−faced hypocrite and the sanctimonious bigot will probably cry, blasphemy! Horrid perversion of God’s word! Wicked wretch! He is not fit to live! &c., &c. But the wise and reflecting will consider, read, and pray. If God be not our Father, grandfather, or great grandfather, or some kind of a father in reality, in deed and in truth, why are we taught to say, “Our Father who art in heaven?” How much soever of holy horror of this doctrine may excite in persons not impregnated with the blood of Christ, and whose minds are consequently dark and benighted, it may excite still more when they are told that if none of the natural blood of Christ flows in their veins, they are not the chosen or elect of God. Object not, therefore, too strongly against the marriage of Christ, but remember that in the last days, secret and hidden things must come to light, and that your life also (which is the blood) is hid with Christ in God.
Click to expand...
In other words, the early Christians were persecuted because they (including Jesus) practiced polygamy. Once the last of the apostles (except John) were put to death for practicing polygamy, the practice ceased, and the apostasy began.

Of course, Mormons no longer believe that the JoD is scripture, but… Those beliefs still exist in LDS culture.
 
jrtrent said:
You are taking your own understanding of the verses in question, which Mormons don’t share, to state that they are calling Christ a liar. That’s why I included the Mormon links and their understanding of aeon–this shows that they are not calling Christ a liar when they say an apostasy occurred, rather, they teach that His predictions of apostasy actually came to pass. For someone to make the rather shocking accusation that Mormons call Christ a liar is, itself, a lie, if they know that’s not what Mormons really believe or teach. At the very least, it’s a fallacious debating tactic designed to manipulate emotions rather than use valid reasoning.

As a former Mormon, I know there are valid reasons for leaving or not joining that faith, but the idea that they call Christ a liar is not one of them.
Click to expand...
jrtrent - Mormons teach the Church started by Jesus Christ fell into apostasy, it failed.

Jesus promised that it would never fail.

Mormon missionaries go around the world telling people that the Church started by Jesus Christ almost 2,000 years ago fell away. It didn’t last.

Do Mormons directly say that Jesus was a liar - no. Do they state with all certainty that the apostasy happened? Yes.

I think Joseph Smith’s stating that Jesus was unable to keep a church together should be reason enough for any Mormon to leave their church. Now that is shocking.

Happy New Year! :winter:
(it’s freeeeezing here in Utah!)
 
lax16 said:
jrtrent - Mormons teach the Church started by Jesus Christ fell into apostasy, it failed.

Jesus promised that it would never fail.
Click to expand...
I keep seeing these ideas asserted, but they are from a particular interpretive viewpoint, one not shared by Mormons and others who believe the church fell into apostasy. You take verses like Matthew 16:18 and 28:20 and extract from them a promise by Christ that the church would not apostasize, but that is not an interpretation shared by all, and particularly not by Mormons. When you start from a false premise, it is not surprising that you end up with a false conclusion–that Mormons call Christ a liar. And it doesn’t even matter if what I quoted from you is true; Mormons don’t believe that way, so their belief that the church apostasized has nothing to do with a perceived broken promise, a promise that to them does not exist.

All I’m getting at is that it’s perfectly valid for you to say, based on whatever Biblical or Church teachings you want to point to, that the Church could not apostasize. Based on that, you can then state that you disagree with the Mormon church’s teaching of a great apostasy and subsequent need for restoration. That’s a legitimate difference in doctrinal belief. You do not need to say that Mormons call Jesus a liar–that’s an offensive allegation that is simply untrue.
 
jrtrent said:
You do not need to say that Mormons call Jesus a liar–that’s an offensive allegation that is simply untrue.
Click to expand...
It is true, which is one of the hypocrisies that can develop with “Continuing Revelation” and a religion not grounded in reason. The President of Mormonism can make proclamations which contradict other proclamations, or when adding two proclamations together they might contradict a third.
Believing in an apostasy makes Christ a liar, yet Mormonism teaches Christ was not a liar. The only way around it is to make up more stuff like word definitions.
Mormonism says they are against abortion, yet allow for abortion. If Mormonism had a reason why they were against abortion, they would not allow abortion. Instead they have random proclamations.

What was the date of the Apostasy? Do you believe it was 570 like the early Mormons?
 
jrtrent said:
I keep seeing these ideas asserted, but they are from a particular interpretive viewpoint, one not shared by Mormons and others who believe the church fell into apostasy. You take verses like Matthew 16:18 and 28:20 and extract from them a promise by Christ that the church would not apostasize, but that is not an interpretation shared by all, and particularly not by Mormons. When you start from a false premise, it is not surprising that you end up with a false conclusion–that Mormons call Christ a liar. And it doesn’t even matter if what I quoted from you is true; Mormons don’t believe that way, so their belief that the church apostasized has nothing to do with a perceived broken promise, a promise that to them does not exist.

All I’m getting at is that it’s perfectly valid for you to say, based on whatever Biblical or Church teachings you want to point to, that the Church could not apostasize. Based on that, you can then state that you disagree with the Mormon church’s teaching of a great apostasy and subsequent need for restoration. That’s a legitimate difference in doctrinal belief. You do not need to say that Mormons call Jesus a liar–that’s an offensive allegation that is simply untrue.
Click to expand...
No, it isn’t. Jesus said His Church would never fail. Mormons say the Church failed. How is that not calling Jesus a liar, and/or weak?
 
TexanKnight said:
No, it isn’t. Jesus said His Church would never fail. Mormons say the Church failed. How is that not calling Jesus a liar, and/or weak?
Click to expand...
You quoted my answer to that question in your most recent post. There is nothing more I can tell you except to go back to the links I provided in post 365 to get a better understanding of the Mormon position on this issue. But then, like me, weren’t you once a Mormon yourself, or do I have you confused with someone else?
 
Stephen168 said:
Believing in an apostasy makes Christ a liar . . .
Click to expand...
Repeating an assertion does not make it true.
What was the date of the Apostasy? Do you believe it was 570 like the early Mormons?
Click to expand...
As I mentioned back in post 120, I don’t even believe in a “great apostasy,” at least not as described by Mormon words like the churches have become an “abomination” or Boettner words like the Catholic Church has become a “religious monstrosity.” It is interesting, though, that Mormon teaching used to fix a date of 570 AD; that’s not something I remember being taught when I was a member. At that time, it was more along the lines here:

"*Elder Mark E. Petersen stated, “But this all had been predicted. The Lord foresaw this apostasy. As he would not perform further miracles before the unbelievers at Capernaum, neither would he leave his anointed Twelve in an apostate group. So John was taken from among men.”

With the last Apostle gone from the church, the night of apostasy was upon it; and so it would remain until the dawn of another day—the day of the Restoration*." forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=10131630#post10131630
 
jrtrent said:
You quoted my answer to that question in your most recent post. There is nothing more I can tell you except to go back to the links I provided in post 365 to get a better understanding of the Mormon position on this issue. But then, like me, weren’t you once a Mormon yourself, or do I have you confused with someone else?
Click to expand...
I was Mormon. I am a returned missionary. I served in the Bishopric and the Elder’s Quorum Presidency. I was a Priesthood Teacher.

And your links do not mean much. Jesus said something. They say just the opposite. They try to avoid out and out calling Jesus a liar…but that is EXACTLY what they are doing.
 
jrtrent said:
Repeating an assertion does not make it true.
Click to expand...
Repeating the denial does not make the denial true. You have not found fault with Christian reasoning to support your belief that there can be an apostasy and Christ not be a liar. I’m surprised you don’t see the hypocrisy
.
jrtrent said:
At that time, it was more along the lines here:
Click to expand...
So what kind of Apostasy do you believe in and when did it happen?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top